• 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

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Why does does a claim that something is believed by the "vast majority of Christendom" never seem to have any reliable figures on which such a presumption is made? And why does such a baseless claim never show any reasonable evidence of what its supposition is based on?

(Kind of answers itself, really)
 
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
Wayne said:
So our founding fathers did an evil thing in establishing this country?
Click to expand...
Not all of our founding fathers were Masons. Only 8 of 56 signers of our Declaration of Independency were Masons. Those 8 like countless other Americans, including myself, made a big mistake to be involved in an organzation which teaches HERESY.
 
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
Masonic Deception: “Freemasonry 101”



Antimason propaganda is easily seen in a piece commonly offered by link for the readers here, by one whose actions here and elsewhere clearly indicate self-promotion of his own webpage more than a desire to inform—or misinform, as it turns out to be in this case. Freemasonry gets a resounding and well-deserved “F” for the course, being full of half-truths and whole untruths, some due to stubborn denial of the truth, some due to simple ignorance of the basic nature of Freemasonry. For instance:

Source; Ahiman Rezon, page 141, Grand Lodge of South Carolina
Click to expand...

​
Wanna see antimason tactics at the most basic level?



TACTIC #1: Use of ellipses to misquote and distort Masonic authors.



This one is pretty benign compared to some examples of the trick, but the subtlety of it is immediately apparent as soon as the missing text is supplied:



"It was the single object of all the ancient rites and mysteries practiced in the very bosom of pagan darkness, shining as a solitary beacon in all that surrounding gloom, and cheering the philosopher in his weary pilgrimage of life, to teach the immortality of the soul.”



Now, sometimes use of ellipsis is done to obliterate truth, other times it is simply for the purpose of “window dressing,” as it is used here. By window dressing, I mean the careful excision of any comments that run the least bit counter to the antimason’s purpose, which is to criticize. By removing the “offensive” phrase in this case, the thought is removed from from view to prevent anyone ever getting any notions that anything in Masonry might be said to “shine as a solitary beacon” or “cheer the philosopher” on his way.



TACTIC #2: Careful choice of where to begin and end the selective quoting, to make thoughts that are only one part of a discussion appear as though they were the main conclusion.



For example, notice where the above quote stops, and what is done with the final line: bold highlights, with the line that is chosen to create this illusion selectively highlighted so it will appear as even more like the concluding thought in the reader’s eyes. But the quote as it began was the beginning of a paragraph; the quote as it ends is not the end of the paragraph, but is one sentence short. Had the entire paragraph been posted and the concluding thought not sliced off, it would read:



“The ceremonies and the lecture,” as a distinguished writer has observed, “beautifully illustrate this all-engrossing subject, and the conclusion we arrive at is, that youth, properly directed, leads the life of man, regulated by morality, faith, and justice, will be rewarded at its closing hour by the prospect of eternal bliss.”



The desired censorship and the reason for it are obvious: someone trying to make a case for false accusations against Freemasonry of “another plan of salvation” will not make much of a case for it, if they include within their quoting of Masonic rituals and lectures a statement indicating that one of the regulating principles of a Mason’s life is faith. It is much easier simply to stop a sentence short in one place, “slice and dice” in another, using whatever means necessary to remove from the reader’s view the details that might expose the false portrayal for what it is.



And in this particular case, reading even just one more paragraph further in the discussion would have been even more revealing for the reader:



This has very properly been called the sublime degree of a Master Mason, as well for the solemnity of the ceremonies which accompany it, as for the profound lessons of wisdom which it inculcates. The important design of the degree is to symbolize the great doctrines of the resurrection of the body and the immortality of the soul; and hence it has been remarked by a learned writer of our Order, that the Master Mason represents a man saved from the grave of iniquity, and raised to the faith of salvation. The lecture is divided into three sections.



Several key elements are included in this paragraph that are crucial to understanding both the third degree of Masonry, and the paragraph so selectively quoted and lifted out of the context of discussion in a section clearly labeled “The Symbolism of the Degree.” (1) One detail is just that: it is symbolism, not straightforward declaration or emphatic proclamation. Thus our attention is directed away from the details that are most descriptive of this as symbolism. In the part which did get quoted in the article, e.g., the idea of symbolism is de-emphasized by ignoring the verbs, which should be the most defining words in a sentence. Thus it is ignored that the quoted part of the statement only says that a Master Mason “represents” a man “quickened into another and better existence”; and it is also ignored that the statement says only that it is “implied” that the Mason thus spoken of is anything more than a “representative” in a symbolic drama that teaches a moral truth. (2) By removing this last statement, a significant link to Christian truth is severed also. The statement is made that “The important design of the degree is to symbolize the great doctrines of the resurrection of the body and the immortality of the soul.”

The only religion that teaches a resurrection of the body is Christianity.

This is just one more instance out of many that show that, despite the non-sectarian claims of Freemasonry, there are distinctive ties that cement its relationship with Christianity as its point of origin. (3) The excision also effectively removes another phrase that would prove problematic to the antimason trying to establish his case here, “raised to the faith of salvation.” Certainly one who goes about trying to establish an accusation of “works righteousness” will do everything possible to exclude any mention of “faith” in connection with “salvation.” Nor would he want the reader to see anything about the Mason being “saved,” especially being saved from a “grave of iniquity,” which is a grave the antimason would much rather prefer to portray the Mason as headed toward, not away from. And again, as before, it is affirmed here only that the Mason in this degree “represents” such a man.





My, what an eminent authority we have on this one! So now we are to circumvent all Grand Lodges and their true authority, and cast our chips in with a PWM from Oregon?
TACTIC #3: Making things that are not appear as though they are.

​
​
​
Several errors are thus added that have no relevance to Masonry. A strange notion is that a Mason may choose as he wishes, “even if his interpretation is not biblical.” In an organization that openly acknowledges that not all of its members are Christians, what purpose does such a phrase serve? What imagined purpose is thus met? ​
​
The truth—there is no purpose in the phrase, it is simply one more reflection of the underlying presupposition that all antimasons share, that Freemasonry is somehow a religion, when it clearly is not, no Mason apprehends it to be his religion, and every statement that can be found by any Grand Lodge anywhere, officially declares in every place that it is a non-sectarian fraternity and not a religion. It also reflects a false understanding of compatibility that insists that for Freemasonry to be compatible with Christianity, it must somehow be Christianity, or be identical with it. It is a patently false standard. My printer is compatible with the Windows XP operating system on my computer. But my printer is not Windows XP itself. On the other hand, a previous printer I had was not Windows XP compatible. At first it worked fine, but eventually there were conflicts. At that point, I could have given up on the problem, but I decided to go online and find what information I could on the problem. When I did, I found out that the two actually were compatible, and I simply did not have a download I needed that would complete the process and enable them to work together. ​
​
To extend that analogy a bit, there was a time when I had been told Christianity and Freemasonry were not compatible, and I had bought into it completely. But I had a feeling that there was reason to doubt what I had been told, and decided to go online and see what information I could find out on the subject. And there I found that things were not as they had seemed. The only reason they seemed incompatible to me was that I had made it so by interjecting beliefs that were not true about Freemasonry. Sadly, there are a large number of people around who have been faced with the same information, and rather than accept the truth and adjust their settings accordingly, they have chosen to try to force the issue and wire it straight from their desktop to their hard drive, to their own detriment. And there are another whole class of them who were functioning compatibly without any difficulty, but in their negligence to install an adequate firewall, they have contracted serious worm infections that are difficult if not impossible to remove. Sadly, such systems are wrought with internal conflicts that hamper their operating efficiency, resulting in constant data output errors. Not only that, the output errors have managed to replicate themselves into a proliferation of self-obsessed antimason websites. Perhaps one day the hard drive may yet be purged and saved, but by then they will have lost all opportunity for useful service. ​
​
The errors above are very basic, and are made over and over no matter how many times antimasons are provided with the corrections. (1) GAOTU is not a name, it is a phrase, and is no different than the common practice of WWJD and other shortened forms that enable everyone to have an abbreviated version of a common phrase. The result is a short form that is easily transmitted and easily recognized. GAOTU is no different, it is a reference to God in a non-sectarian form which every Mason will recognize, no matter which religion he is of. Why Masonry did not simply elect to use the simpler non-sectarian form "God" is the only mystery here. (2) “Syncretistic” is a total misnomer, being a joining of religions. That is not what Masonry is, because the individual Mason is told up front nothing will conflict with his religion, the Lodge has no interest in what his individual and personal religious or political opinions may be, and is told that each Mason must keep his own religious beliefs. That would not be true in a syncretistic system where all the members’ religious beliefs would be subsumed into a larger whole and designated as a separate religion—circumstances which clearly are not true of Freemasonry.​


TACTIC #4: Accuse them with “Masons are biblically illiterate and spiritually ignorant.”

(1) What is non-biblical about a God who is Sovereign Creator? It is the only God-concept asked or required of a Mason.​
​
(2) I’d say there is an even greater biblical illiteracy among ex-Masons, given the misuses and abuses I have seen of the Word when applied by them. I have been banned from websites for holding biblical views that apparently 90% or more of the Christian Church agrees are biblical. ​
​
That’s not exactly a crowd that I will allow to dictate to me what is/is not “biblical.”​
​
​
​
​
TACTIC #5: Keep repeating the same accusations, but adapt them after each refutation to prevent them being refuted the same way. ​
​
Prayer is intensely personal, and remains so even in group prayer with those of one’s own religion. This has been stated and restated time and again, and each time, the antimasons go back to the drawing board and look for a way to reframe the accusation to make it appear somehow worse, or to approach it from another angle. ​
​
So now I see we have yet another re-framing of it, “calling into presence,” a term I have not seen in use in any Christian Church or any theological discussion anywhere at any time. It is simply a reframe designed to get around the fact that individuals praying in community, unless they are praying some type of unison prayer such as the Lord’s Prayer, are still mainly “individuals praying in a group” if they are not of the same faith. The reframe attempts to get around the inward and personal aspect of each one’s prayer, by having each one “call his own god into presence,” thus trying to create the image of several gods together in the room. The whole scenario is a farcical attempt to ferret out a blameable practice. But we all know God is present with us at all times, He promised never to leave us nor forsake us, that where two or three are gathered, He is in the midst of us, that even as Paul said to a mixed audience, “He is not far from each one of us.” ​
​
Any feeling that one must somehow “call Him into presence” is not a Masonic concept—or, I’m afraid, a biblical one.​
​
​
​
This represents, once again, a total misunderstanding of Masonic symbology. The first three degrees, as already stated, are symbolic of the three ages of man, birth, life, and death. At birth an infant goes from darkness to light. The Masonic representation of going from darkness to light is symbolic of the “new birth,” or “spiritual birth” that everyone must undergo who walks the pathway with God. “Light” in Masonry also is simply a reference to one’s knowledge, or lack of it, of Masonic principles.




TACTIC #6: The Miscast

Here I will simply have to disagree with you. The older forms of description, along with most of the newer ones, all describe the first of the Three Great Lights as the Holy Bible, not the VSL. I have not found in any discussion of the Three Great Lights, a definition that includes VSL, they all say Holy Bible. But even if one were to be found, it would be a complete error to think that in thereby finding one, the whole point has been gained, and to declare VSL to be the correct usage, when such a vast majority of what one finds in Masonry declares it to be the Holy Bible.

And again, “Masonically speaking,” this is just plain antimason moral ignorance of Freemasonry. What is an antimason doing making accusations about the theme of darkness versus light as found in Freemasonry, when the explanatory lectures have clearly defined for anyone to see, exactly what the symbolic interpretation of it is? Why, after asking this same question over and over and over, and being given the same explanation, does any antimason continuing asking this same question over and over and over?

TACTIC #7: Use obscure sources with slightly different wording, and play on the nuances.

I think Mr. Larson could and should have chosen his words a bit more carefully. His description, as worded, is one that I and many other Masons would take exception to. I certainly believe the right intent was there, the meaning gets skewed ever so slightly with his choice of words, that it “could just as easily be” some other book. That specific way of wording it opens the door to an erroneous interpretation to mean, “it could just as easily be any other book in this Lodge.” And that would be a false statement, as only one book resides on the altar as that Lodge’s VSL. By far the majority of them do have the Holy Bible.

It is also a false statement that “we, as Masons, make no distinction of one bible to another.” Why? Because clearly, we do. The common description is “the Bible in a Christian Lodge, the Koran in an Arab Lodge, the Old Testament in a Jewish Lodge,” etc. But Freemasonry does not, Masons do not, dictate to the individual Mason which book he must choose as his own source for finding the will of God. The Book on the altar in all U.S. Lodges, by the way, is the Holy Bible. In most of them, that is defined in their constitution and by-laws as a requirement, it being stated that no Lodge is considered “regular,” that is, legally and properly opened, unless the Holy Bible is present on the altar.

The “Masonic view” described above is not a “Masonic view” at all, Masonry does not consider all holy writings “equally valid” at all, it simply does not make any assertions about that which is ultimately symbolic anyway, as are all things Masonic—the VSL symbolizing the will of God. The objection has been raised even at that, with a feigned indignance that the Bible may be spoken of as a “mere” symbol. To which, of course, the simple response is offered, that the thing it symbolizes is the will of God. Thus the antimason would try to tell us there is such a thing as the "mere" will of God.

TACTIC #8: Substituting the obscure for the obvious. (See Tactic #6: The Miscast. This is another version of it, playing mainly on the phrase above, “in and of ourselves,” which probably appears nowhere anywhere else in Masonry.)

Now here the whole challenge goes clear off the map. The Three Great Lights are Holy Bible, Square, and Compass. The Bible is taken as a given (remember, the Three Great Lights discussion never, to my knowledge, substitutes “VSL” for “Holy Bible”). Since the particular lecture that applies has been mentioned, let’s look at it in its entirety:


The fact is, the Bible is stated as the first Great Light of Masonry, introduced even before the square and compasses. It is the Book on the altar in every Lodge that has been quoted from in this “Freemasonry 101” treatise thus far. The Bible, therefore, is presumed to be operative as the rule and guide of the Mason’s faith before he employs the Square and Compasses in the effort toward self-improvement. There is ample evidence from the epistles encouraging the very same actions that Masons describe as “squaring our actions with all mankind” and “divesting the mind of the vices and superfluities of life.” Anyone with even a little understanding will see that nothing different is being said, intended, or implied.

​
​
TACTIC #9: Use the accusation of “scripture-twisting.” This is the one accusation which, if believed by the readers, will gain the most leverage.​
​
It is a mischaracterization to call something a “mutilating” which is clearly never intended as a direct scriptural quote. Had the writer used quotation marks, there might be a case for it; as it is written, the accusation is ridiculous. ​
​
But I find it strange to find an accusation of “scripture-twisting” coming from a member of an organization that has repeatedly interpreted the verse about “the Stone that the builders rejected” to mean that Freemasons (interpreted as the “builders”) have rejected Jesus Christ. ​
​
I kid you not, folks. They have actually claimed this at EMFJ.​
​
From a conversation with Duane Washum at the emfj forum, 9/6/03:​
​
​
​
Not much I can say about that, those guys do whatever they wish with Scripture, and then throw accusations around at everybody else?​
​
The Three Great Lights are defined and applied well before the Common Gavel lecture is presented. The Holy Bible is the rule and guide, the blueprint if you will, and the working tools are the instruments by which the principles of the Word are applied in implementing these principles in relationship with God, others, and self. The only appalling thing about them is that a former 32nd degree Mason does not seem to have ever grasped what is one of the simplest, most basic concepts of Masonry.​
​
​
​
​
​
Masonry says no different, the Bible is declared as “the rule and guide of our faith.” The Mason is presented with a Bible and told to be diligent in studying it and applying its principles to his life—before the common gavel lecture mentioning these things. No, there is no direct mention of Jesus in the ritual, but He is there in numerous ways symbolically (Masonry is, after all, a system of morality "veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols.") There is no way a Christian hearing about the Lambskin apron as an emblem of purity, the Cornerstone of the building, being built up as “living stones,” and the “Stone that the builders rejected” can draw any other inference than Christ. And Masonry certainly would not tell Masons that only those who are in Christ are the Temple of God, for that would be a sectarian teaching. But you can be sure, the Masons who are Christians will see that.​
​
​
​
​
​
The Common Gavel says nothing about the use of it as an instrument becoming the means of “going to heaven.” It does speak of “fitting us” for heaven, which is very different from saying it is a means of salvation. The 10 virgins are told to keep their lamps trimmed and burning, for the Bridegroom will return. They are not told this is the means of their salvation, because their belief in the Bridegroom is the means for that. But keeping their lamps trimmed and burning is a sure expression of their belief, just as the actions of the foolish virgins is a clear sign they did not--thus it is an action "fitting them" for heaven. Following through on these things is an indication of the person’s belief in God, not in some “means of going to heaven. The same is said elsewhere as may be said of this action, that the true Mason will not do his duty simply for what he gains thereby, but he does his duty simply because it is right, and the right thing to do.



Besides, did you miss the earlier part of the lecture, about operative Masons using the gavel to “knock the corners off of rough stones, the better to fit them to the Builder’s use?” The Speculative Mason basically does the same thing, allows the Builder to knock the corners off, seeking to become an instrument fitted to His use—but Masons tend to think of that “fitted to the Builder’s use” as having application in this life, not the next. I daresay in that regard, they fare better, in many ways, than does the church in inculcating the same with its people.





This is a mundane, worn-out argument, based as it is on one little passage in one little portion of ritual, being stated almost as an afterthought and not as a declaration about salvation. I’ve shown the relevant Scriptures over and over and over again that prove that the statement about "purity of life and rectitude of conduct" is the equivalent to the Christian faith in the doctrines of justification and sanctification, and that both are necessary. It is pre-figured in the OT in David’s remark, "Who shall ascend into the holy hill of God? He who has clean hands and a pure heart." It finds no application to any concept of "performing good works." And it totally ignores all the other places in Masonry that symbolically teach a very different lesson. Like the total dependence of one coming into the Lodge on a guide. Like the candidate being asked by what right or benefit he expects to gain admission, and answering "by the benefit of a pass," and upon being asked whether he had that pass, answering that another had it and pledge it in his behalf—a striking picture of the necessity of Christ making the way for us. Or like the mention of the Mason having a "firm reliance upon Divine Providence, and in the merits of the Lion of the tribe of Judah" as his assurance for the "Celestial Lodge Above."

​


​
​
​
There is no “if” to it, these are the words of the ritual, and they are from the Holy Bible, the only “holy book” that is ever quoted anywhere in Masonic ritual. And your statement that they are “read” is another fiction, because they are never read, they are, like everything else in ritual, always recited from memory. In other words, with all the ample quotes found in the rituals, those who learn the degree work of the various degrees of Masonry, by the time they learn them all, have memorized quite a few solid passages of Scripture.​
​
The Masonic explanation of the symbolism of the Plumb to the Fellow Craft Mason:​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
Antimasons make this out to be a Mason “establishing his own righteousness,” but they do so by making their customary hop, skip, and jump from one Lodge manual to another, picking and choosing the ones with slight differences in wording that can be made to appear accusable. There are many which declare a "firm reliance on Divine Providence" and "faith in the merits of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, who has prevailed to open the seven seals," but they get ignored. Antimasons prefer microscopic focus on the minors rather than honest discourse upon the whole.​
​
​
​

​
​
Another example of mischaracterization, trying to make it look like the comment above was trying to blur the lines between right and wrong. All it truly says is, "each individual Mason's own preferred religion is the proper place for him to go for a systematic determination of what constitutes morality." And that is essentially true, although for the most part those views will be fairly similar.​
​
​



You forget, that is simply the general Masonic interpretation. The individual Mason being allowed his own interpretation, it sounds like you have already got a handle on the Christian Mason's view of the same symbol as being symbolic of the Holy Spirit's work of effecting unity among men.​
 
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
Not all of our founding fathers were Masons. Only 8 of 56 signers of our Declaration of Independency were Masons. Those 8 like countless other Americans, including myself, made a big mistake to be involved in an organzation which
Click to expand...
teaches HERESY.
Click to expand...


If this were true, how could George Washington be such a solid Christian?
 
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 MASONIC LODGE AND THE CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE
by John Weldon

Summary

The Masonic Lodge in America is a highly influential organization claiming some four million members. Masonic leaders argue the lodge is not a religion but merely a fraternal body that seeks to better society and also assist the Christian church. It does this, they claim, by helping Christians become better members of their own faith.

The truth is that Masonry is a distinct religion that espouses teachings incompatible with Christian faith in the areas of God, salvation, and other important doctrines. It is therefore inconsistent for any Christian to swear the oaths of Masonry to uphold and support the Lodge when Masonry's own ritual, doctrines, and impact in history have denied and opposed biblical teaching.

This is so despite the 1993 recommendation of the Southern Baptists at their annual convention that membership in the Lodge can be left to the Christian's individual conscience.

"Because of your support, the vote of the Southern Baptist Convention is a historic and positive turning point for Freemasonry. Basically, it is a vitalization of our Fraternity by America's largest Protestant denomination after nearly a year of thorough, scholarly study. At the same time, it is a call to renewed effort on the part of all Freemasons today to re-energize our Fraternity and move forward to fulfilling its mission as the world's foremost proponent of Brotherhood of Man under the Fatherhood of God." The Scottish Rite Journal, Aug. 1993.

Millions of men throughout the world, including four million Americans, look to the Masonic Lodge for brotherhood and fellowship. They are proud to be part of an organization that engages itself in worthwhile causes, such as children's hospitals. Many of them feel strongly about the Masonic tenets of the Fatherhood of God, the brotherhood of man, and the immortality of the soul.

Masonry (or Freemasonry) claims to be the friend of Christianity, and yet it contains doctrines that are contrary to biblical teaching. As unpleasant as it may be, it is the obligation of the discerning Christian to point this out, both for the sake of the hundreds of thousands of Christian Masons and for those who might yet become Masons.

The relationship of Masonry to Christian faith has been controversial for at least 200 years, and over that period the different sides have attempted to defend their positions to the best of their abilities. Therefore, confusion often befalls the layperson who must carefully wade through the arguments on both sides before he or she can hope to resolve the issue responsibly. While this article cannot relieve such laypeople of the task of discerning the matter, its purpose is to provide them with a strong yet concise presentation of the case against Christian involvement with Masonry. (Further documentation and analysis of the claims and arguments of Masonry can be found in Bowing at Strange Altars [an evaluation of the Southern Baptist Study on Masonry] and The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge: A Christian Appraisal, both of which I coauthored with Dr. John Ankerberg. I urge interested readers to secure these volumes for further study in dealing with this issue. This article is primarily excerpted, with some changes, from Bowing at Strange Altars.)

This article was planned for the JOURNAL long before controversial publications on Masonry were released by the Southern Baptists. However, because the Southern Baptist publications bring all of the concerns I intended to address into sharp focus, and because they are of significant contemporary concern, they will play an important role in my evaluation of Masonry.

MASONRY AND THE SOUTHERN BAPTISTS

A committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest Protestant denomination in America, concluded in its two 1993 publications, A Study of Freemasonry (hereafter Study) and A Report on Freemasonry (hereafter Report) — and at its annual convention the same year — that it cannot frankly state it is wrong for a Christian to join the Masonic Lodge.1 In so doing the Southern Baptists are perhaps the only conservative Christian denomination in America not to warn their constituents that membership in the Masonic Lodge is not compatible with biblical teaching.

In the coming years many other churches and denominations will face the question of whether their members should participate in the Masonic Lodge. What happened in the Southern Baptist Convention's examination of Masonry points to the necessity for churches and denominations examining this subject to carefully select their investigative committees. Such committees should be composed of individuals who not only accept the authority and inerrancy of Scripture, but who will also not uncritically accept Masonic claims of compatibility with Christianity or be influenced by political pressures — as was true for the Southern Baptists.2

In its six-page Report, the Baptist Home Mission Board listed numerous reasons why it is wrong for a Christian to be a member of the Masonic Lodge. For example, it cited several illustrations from the first three degrees of Masonry (the Blue Lodge degrees) concerning the taking of bloody oaths by the Masonic initiate. It warned, "Even though these oaths, obligations and rituals may or may not be taken seriously by the initiate, it is inappropriate for a Christian to 'sincerely promise and swear,' with the hand on the Holy Bible, any such promises or oaths, or to participate in any such pagan rituals" (emphases added).3 The Report also stated, "Many tenets and teachings of Freemasonry are not compatible with Christianity and Southern Baptist doctrine...," and again cited examples such as the teachings of salvation by personal character/good works and the doctrine of universalism.4

In fact, both the Study and the Report offered solid reasons why Masonry and Christianity are incompatible and why Christians shouldn't participate in the Lodge. But then, illogically, they gave the contradictory advice that membership in a Masonic Order should be a matter of personal conscience. In what follows I demonstrate the problems with this conclusion.

MASONRY AND SALVATION

It is my contention that the Masonic ritual (i.e., Masonry's ceremonial rites of initiation that all Masons must pass through) of the First, Second, and Third Degrees teach all Masons exactly what God condemns as a false gospel, namely that a person is saved and goes to heaven as a result of his or her personal character and good works. As all Christians know, the Bible places such a teaching under God's curse. Paul said in Galatians 1:8-9: "But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that we have preached to you, let him be accursed." The Bible clearly teaches how a man is saved: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9. Cf. John 3:16; 5:24; 6:47; Rom. 3:28-4:6; 11:6).

Proof of Masonry's false gospel can be found in standard "Monitors" — the official textbooks containing authoritative Masonic ritual which are more or less uniform for each state. In the ritual, the Masonic symbol of the lambskin or white leather apron is explained, in part, to each candidate as follows: "The lamb has in all ages been deemed an emblem of innocence; he, therefore, who wears the lambskin as a badge of Masonry, is thereby continually reminded of that purity of life and conduct, which is essentially necessary to his gaining admission into the Celestial Lodge Above, where the Supreme Architect of the Universe [God] presides (emphasis added).5"

Please keep in mind that the instruction concerning the lambskin can be found in the Ritual book of all the Lodges in all 50 states. None exclude it, although it may be placed in different rituals in the manuals of different states.

When a Mason is told that his purity of life and conduct is necessary to his gaining admission into the Celestial Lodge Above (i.e., heaven), how can anyone deny that Masonry is teaching another way of salvation than what the Bible teaches? How can anyone deny that this is a works gospel?

In the Second Degree (the Fellow Craft Degree) and elsewhere the candidate is instructed further in the importance of the lambskin as follows: "You are to wear it as an emblem of that purity of heart and conscience that is necessary to obtain for you the approval of the Grand Architect of the Universe" (emphasis added).6 Moreover, as even some Masonic authorities have admitted, Masonry has, in all, some 40 degrees implying or teaching its candidates salvation by personal merit.7

What did the Southern Baptist Report conclude on this issue? The Committee that engaged in the study agreed that such teachings were "not compatible with Christianity or Southern Baptist doctrine."8 The Report likewise concluded that Masonic writings and rituals imply that "salvation may be attained by one's good works," and therefore that some "Masons...may be led to believe they can earn salvation by living a pure life with good conduct."9 In addition, the Study confessed that Masons "insist the lambskin [i.e., lambskin apron, used in Masonic ritual] does not bring salvation, but rather, 'the purity of life' it symbolizes brings salvation" (emphasis added).10

The Committee stated that there was "the prevalent use of the term [Masonic] 'light,' which some may understand as a reference to salvation rather than knowledge or truth."11 The Report further conceded that "the heresy of universalism (the belief that all people will eventually be saved), which permeates the writings of many Masonic authors...is a doctrine inconsistent with New Testament teaching."12

In its mention of former Mason Jack Harris, the Study noted that "Harris was typical of other Masons who hope Freemasonry will take them to heaven" (emphasis added).13 Here it is acknowledged that Masons can indeed believe that Masonry alone is sufficient for salvation.

But Masonry also teaches that individuals may be saved by being good members of their respective religions — whether Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, or other. For example, Dr. Jim Tresner, director of the Masonic Leadership Institute, affirmed that Masonry "leaves the member to devote himself to his own religious faith to receive...salvation."14

In light of the above confessions I am perplexed. In 1992 the Southern Baptist Convention passed a resolution entitled, "On Christian Witness and Voluntary Associations," encouraging Christians everywhere to (1) "maintain Christian witness openly before the world"; (2) avoid "any association which conflicts with clear biblical teaching"; and (3) "affirm that biblical doctrine is to be open and public knowledge and that the Christian faith is to be a clear and public expression of the truth that Jesus Christ is the only means of salvation, that the Bible is our infallible guide..." (emphases added).15

By stating such confessions and conclusions in its resolution in 1992, the SBC had effectively prohibited Christians from joining the Masonic Lodge. In light of these admonitions to Christians everywhere, how can the Home Mission Board and the Southern Baptist Convention a year later conclude that Freemasonry does not ultimately oppose Christian doctrine and that individual Christians are free to join the Masonic Lodge?16

THE MASONIC GOD

During the ritual, Masonry has its candidates swear that they believe in God, typically called the "Great Architect of the Universe." It also informs them that all Masons are to bow before the sacred name of Deity, and explains that all Masons of every country, religion, and opinion are united in the belief that they have been created by one Almighty Parent. The question is, Is this Almighty Parent or Great Architect — the God of the Masonic Lodge — also the God of the Bible? The answer is clearly no.

In the "Masonic Bible," published by the A. J. Holman Press, we are told this "Almighty Parent" is the one true God that all men worship. This is so regardless of the name by which He is identified: Jehovah, Krishna, Buddha, Allah, or some other.

The Masonic Bible is actually the King James Version bound with a special cover stamped with the Masonic insignia. In the front of this Bible there is a lengthy preface made up of articles concerning Masonry and the Bible. One of these articles is entitled, "The Great Light in Masonry," written by Masonic authority Joseph Fort Newton, who states: "For Masonry knows, what so many forget, that religions are many, but religion is one...therefore, it [Masonry] invites to its altar men of all faiths, knowing that, if they use different names for 'the nameless one of a hundred names,' they are yet praying to the one God and Father of all" (emphasis added).17

But when a Hindu prays to Vishnu or Shiva, is he really praying to Jesus? When a Muslim prays to Allah, is she really praying to Jehovah? When Buddhists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Mormons pray, are they really praying to the same God the Christian prays to? The answer is no, because all these concepts of God are opposed to the concept of God as revealed in the Bible.18
 
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 MASONIC LODGE AND THE CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE
by John Weldon

Another Masonic authority, Carl H. Claudy, writes:

[The Mason] must declare his faith in a Supreme Being before he may be initiated. But note that he is not required to say, then or ever, what God. He may name him as he will, think of him as he pleases; make him impersonal law or personal and anthropomorphic; Freemasonry cares not...God, Great Architect of the Universe, Grand Artificer, Grand Master of the Grand Lodge Above, Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, Vishnu, Shiva, or Great Geometer (emphases added).19

And,

Masonry does not specify any God of any creed; she requires merely that you believe in some Deity, give him what name you will....A belief in God is essential to a Mason, but...any God will do, so [long as] he is your God (emphasis added).20

Masonry thus argues that all people of varying faiths are really praying to the one true God, the universal Father of humankind, regardless of the name they give him. Nevertheless, this "Almighty Parent" of Masonry is a different God than Christianity teaches — a fact conceded by both Masonic sympathizers as well as Masons themselves. The Baptist Study agreed that the Great Architect of Masonry is not the Jehovah of the Bible: "The Masonic Great Architect of the Universe appears more like the Aristotelian 'First Cause' than the personal God who has revealed Himself in the Bible."21

In his encyclopedia on Masonry, Masonic authority Henry Wilson Coil refers to the biblical God as "a partisan, tribal God" and implies that such a God-concept is far inferior to the God of Masonry, which is

a boundless, eternal, universal, undenominational, and international, Divine Spirit, so vastly removed from the speck called man, that He cannot be known, named, or approached. So soon as man begins to laud his God and endow him with the most perfect human attributes, such as justice, mercy, beneficence, etc., the Divine essence is depreciated and despoiled....The Masonic test [for membership] is a Supreme Being, and any qualification added is an innovation and distortion (emphasis added).22

Coil even admits that "monotheism... violates Masonic principles, for it requires belief in a specific kind of Supreme Deity" (emphasis added).23 Of course, at this point Coil has just excluded the God of biblical teaching and Christian faith for being too specific despite the fact that he has ascribed a specific doctrine of God (eternal, unknowable, etc.) to Masonry.

Masonic authority24 Albert Pike also denies the biblical God. He argues that "if our conceptions of God are those of the ignorant, narrow-minded, and vindictive Israelite...we feel that it is an affront and an indignity to [God]...."25 Anyone who has ever read what Albert Pike and other Masons have taught about God in the higher degrees of Masonry knows that the God of Masonry has nothing whatever to do with the God of the Bible.26 For example, Pike categorized the God of Scripture as a false god and an idol when he wrote that "every religion and every conception of God is idolatrous, insofar as it is imperfect, and as it substitutes a feeble and temporary idea in the shrine of that Undiscoverable Being [of Masonry]..." (emphasis added).27

If Masonry rejects the God of Christianity, however, how can it logically claim to be the true friend of Christian faith? Further, if it offers an unknowable, unapproachable, and undiscoverable God beyond the different concepts of God found in other religions, how can it appropriately or logically ask the men of those religions to join its local lodges?

Masonry does this because it seeks to develop a worldwide religious brotherhood beyond the sectarian religious beliefs of humankind. To further this goal it must, at one level, accept all religions, while simultaneously pointing and leading to a "higher" truth beyond separatist religion — a truth that is capable of uniting all men in a common universal brotherhood, that is, the fraternity of Masonry.

Masonry therefore encourages all members of different religions to pray to and worship their own respective gods: Brahma, Krishna, Allah, Buddha, Jehovah, Vishnu, Jesus, and so forth. This is the means by which Masonry can appeal to the members of all the different religions in the world and attempt to unite them in a universal "common brotherhood."

But then Masons cannot possibly all be praying to the same God because all these gods are different in nature and in what they expect of humans (if they expect anything). In other words, the Masonic doctrine of the spiritual "Fatherhood of God and Brotherhood of man" is only valid if there is some larger God beyond the contradictory lesser gods that people worship.

On the one hand Masonry claims it is an organization of tolerance that accepts the different religions of all people; on the other hand, it offers a supreme God that is supposedly the one true God that all people are really praying to, who is beyond the inferior, primitive concepts of individual religion — whether Christian, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, or any other.28

At whatever level Masonry approaches God, however, its theology presents irresolvable conflicts for the Christian. If the Christian God is merely an inferior and false concept, then Masonry denies that the God of the Bible is the one true God. Further, if Masonry points Christians to an unknowable "Almighty Parent" beyond all religion, then it encourages Masons to worship a false god, and this is idolatry. This violates the first commandment in which God warned His people, "You shall have no other gods before Me" (see Exod. 20:4-6; Deut. 13:1-5).

Even at a surface level Masonry actively encourages idolatry. The Baptist Study, for example, cites The Freemasons' Diary as setting "this priority for a Mason concerning his faith and religious practice: a Freemason is encouraged to do his duty first to his God (by whatever name he is known) through his faith and religious practice..." (emphasis added).29

To encourage Masons to do their religious duty to their various gods is to encourage the Muslim Mason to worship and serve Allah; the Hindu Mason to worship and serve Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva; the Buddhist Mason to worship Buddha and various Buddhist deities; the Mormon Mason to worship Mormonism's own gods; and the pagan Mason to worship any variety of additional gods. This is unacceptable for the Christian in that it promotes spiritual deception under the guise of alleged spiritual brotherhood.

Jesus emphasized, "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (John 17:3). God Himself declares, "I, even I, am the Lord; and there is no savior besides Me....I am the Lord and there is no other; besides Me there is no God" (Isa. 43:11; 45:5). Jesus also emphasized that "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and truth" (John 4:24). How, then, can Christian Masons logically join and swear allegiance to actively support Masonry when it encourages people to believe in false gods and to deny the truth that God has revealed in the Bible?
 
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 MASONIC LODGE AND THE CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE
by John Weldon

MASONRY AND PAGAN RELIGION

The previously mentioned 1992 SBC resolution that encompassed Freemasonry stated: "Be it finally RESOLVED, That we urge all Southern Baptists to refrain from participation or membership in organizations with teachings, oaths, or mystical knowledge which are contrary to the Bible and to the public expression of our faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ, which must be above all reproach."30 Further, the Study of Freemasonry submitted to the Baptist Home Mission Board conceded that "a Christian Mason who takes the higher degrees of the Scottish Rite will be exposed to beliefs and practices quite different from his own. For example, the candidate is introduced to Egyptian deities Osiris, Isis, Horus, and Amun; to Scandinavian deities Odin, Frea, and Thor; to Hindu, Greek, and Persian deities; and to Jewish Kabbalism [i.e., occultism]....It cannot be denied that some of the religions studied in these degrees are pagan and that their teachings are totally incompatible with Christianity" (emphasis added).31

The Report on Freemasonry concluded that paganism is not only found in Masonic rituals, but it also discovered paganism in many readings that Masonry encourages its initiates to pursue: "[Many of] the recommended readings, in pursuance of advanced degrees, of religions and philosophies...are undeniably pagan and/or occult..." (emphasis added).32 Among those mentioned are the writings of Masonic authorities or authors Albert Pike, Albert Mackey, Manley Hall, Rex Hutchins, and W. L. Wilmshurst.

Even some official Masonic Monitors encourage paganism. The Texas Monitor, for example, tells us:

These [aspects and teachings of Masonry] were practiced from remote ages, in ancient temples of many nations....The most learned among Masonic scholars...conclude that Masonry is of very ancient origin, and is, in some aspects, the modern successor of, and heir to, the sublime Mysteries of the Temple of Solomon, and of the Temples of India, Chaldea, Egypt, Greece, and Rome, as well as the basic doctrine of the Essenes, Gnostics and other mystic Orders.33

Because the Texas Monitor argues that Masonry is related to ancient paganism, it advises that

every candidate for the Mysteries of Masonry, at the proper time and in an appropriate manner, should be taught the truth that the rite of Initiation means much more than a formal ceremonial progress through the Degrees....Initiation is to be attained only after real labor, deep study, profound meditation, extensive research and a constant practice of those virtues which will open a true path to moral, intellectual, and spiritual illumination.34

In other words, the Texas Monitor itself maintains that the initiate is to be informed as to and/or practiced in the deeper pagan meanings of the Masonic Ritual.

JESUS CHRIST

The Baptist Study comments, "it is not true that Freemasonry ignores or denies Jesus Christ" (emphasis added).35 The Study nevertheless admits that "Freemasonry today does not see Jesus as the unique Son of God and Savior of the world."36

The Masonic Ritual of the First, Second, and Third Degrees never instructs its members that Jesus is the only mediator between God and men. It never tells them they can't truthfully call God their Father until they have a relationship with His Son. It doesn't tell initiates that they can't build their spiritual house until they ask Jesus Christ to forgive them of their sins and build it for them. No Mason is ever told officially that a man can never do enough good deeds or live a pure enough life to gain admission into the Celestial Lodge Above, or that entrance into heaven comes only by faith in Jesus Christ. The truth is that by its ritual, teachings, and prayers, Masonry does ignore and deny Jesus Christ.37

IS MASONRY A RELIGION?

One of the key issues in this discussion is whether or not Masonry is a religion.38 The Baptist Study concluded: "Strong feelings have been expressed on both sides of this difficult issue....the overwhelming majority of Masons reject the idea that Freemasonry is a religion. The various monitors of the Grand Lodges and statements from the overwhelming majority of Masonic leaders in the past and today deny that Freemasonry is a religion"(emphases added).39

No one denies that the vast majority of Masons say Masonry is not a religion, but one must go beyond mere claims. For example, virtually all Mormons claim their religion is Christian, which is demonstrably false.40

Masonry claims it has the qualities of a religion but is still not a religion; or that it is religious but still not a religion. However, the latter point makes as much sense (as even Coil pointed out) as to say that a man has no intellect but is intellectual, or that he has no honor but is honorable. Religious is defined as "imbued with or adhering to religion or a religion."41

While it is possible for an organization to have a religious quality and yet not be a religion — such as Christian groups that specialize in missions or research and have daily periods of prayer, Masonry is more than this. The religious quality of Christian organizations is based on Christianity while the religious quality of Masonry is based on Masonry itself, which qualifies it as a religion.

The Study wrongly concluded that Masonry is not a religion. Nevertheless it was forced to confess that "many men make the Lodge their religion."42

The major issue in determining whether Masonry is a religion is to look at its demands on the candidate. Masonry requires the candidate to believe in God, obey Him, worship Him, seek His guidance, and so forth, which qualifies it as a religion. And, as I have already documented, Masonry claims its members will earn admittance to heaven based on personal character and good works. This also classifies the Lodge as a religion. In fact, any standard dictionary or encyclopedia definition of religion proves beyond doubt that Masonry is a religion.43 Dr. Shildes Johnson is only one of many scholars of comparative religion who have concluded: "A comparison of the moral, allegorical, and symbolic teachings of Freemasonry with these definitions of a religion reveals that the lodge is a theistic, non-Christian, man-centered, and universal religion."44

All this is why numerous leading Masonic authorities have publicly confessed that Masonry is, in fact, a religion. For example:

Albert G. Mackey: "The religion of Masonry is cosmopolitan, universal...."45

Henry Wilson Coil: "Religion is espoused by the Masonic Ritual and required of the candidate"; and, "Freemasonry is undoubtedly religion"; and, "Many Freemasons make this flight [to heaven] with no other guarantee of a safe landing than their belief in the religion of Freemasonry" (emphasis added).46

Albert Pike: "Masonry...is the universal, eternal, immutable religion...."47

Joseph Fort Newton: "Everything in Masonry has reference to God, implies God, speaks of God, points and leads to God. Not a degree, not a symbol, not an obligation, not a lecture, not a charge but finds its meaning and derives its beauty from God the Great Architect, in whose temple all Masons are workmen."48

Doesn't all this constitute evidence that Masonry is a religion? Yet the Study of the Southern Baptist Home Mission Board concluded it is not a religion.49

The Baptist Study offered a number of reasons to allegedly substantiate its claim that Masonry is not a religion. For example, it points out that in a 1921 decision the Supreme Court of Nebraska ruled that Freemasonry is not a religion. But all this means is that the Supreme Court of Nebraska was wrong. State Supreme Courts and even the Supreme Court of the United States have frequently been wrong, as can be proven by the number of opinion reversals enacted by those bodies. The United States Supreme Court has reversed itself no less than 200 times in its history. These are admissions of error.

The Study next cites the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts of America. It points out that not all Scouts are Christians. Yet Christians may become members of the Scouts without worshipping the gods of those in the Scouts who follow other religions, such as Mormons and Hindus. "Baptist youth certainly do not worship the physical god of Mormonism or the impersonal god of Hinduism, yet they join with youth and leaders from these religions to earn religious emblems. They have certain rituals that identify them as Scouts anywhere in the world...."50

What if the Boy Scouts of America claimed it was not a religion when it was? What if the Scouts had an agenda that they kept hidden? What if the Scouts had their own plan of salvation? What if the Scouts actively taught members that they could be saved and go to heaven by good works? What if the Scouts had bloody oaths requiring secrecy on pain of death?51 Who would argue that Christian youth should join such an organization?

Next, the Study claims that those individuals who allow Masonry to become their religion do so only because of their own misinterpretation or misunderstanding of Masonry and (quoting a Southern Baptist Mason) "not due to Masonic teaching."52 In The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, however, John Ankerberg and I devoted some 200 pages showing that the reason individuals do make Masonry their religion is "due to Masonic teaching."

Perhaps it is worth noting that of all the conservative Christian bodies who have studied Masonry, I discovered almost unanimous agreement among them that Masonry is a religion and that Masonry and Christianity are not compatible.53 The conclusion of a Presbyterian report is only one of almost two dozen denominational inquiries that concluded Masonry is a religion: "In our study of Freemasonry's promotional literature, through personal interviews with Masons, and by letters received from Masons, we were told that Freemasonry is not a religion. However, a close scrutiny of the ritual of the lodge and books written by authoritative Masons points to the contrary...(emphasis added).54

In its section on the position of other Christian denominations relative to Masonry, even the Baptist Study documents that Masonry has been rejected by the Roman Catholic church, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, the Presbyterian Church in America, the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, the Greek Orthodox Church, the Church of the Nazarene, the Church of the Brethren, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Assemblies of God, the Reformed Presbyterian Church, "and other Christian denominations have also taken positions against Freemasonry, or against secret societies without mentioning Freemasonry."55

One must wonder, "Didn't this near-unanimous condemnation tell Baptist committee members something?!" If Masonry and Christianity are really compatible (as the Baptist Study implies), and if individual Christians can actually become Masons "in good conscience," then why all the negative conclusions condemning Masonry and urging Christians not to join the Masonic Lodge from all these widely varying Christian bodies?

The Study acknowledges that "this issue has divided Baptists for two centuries."56 But why has it divided Baptists for two centuries? We think the reason is evident — because the Baptist tradition has never officially taken a position on Masonry, thereby allowing individual Christians in every generation to be deceived by its false claims. This would seem to explain why, as the Study itself concedes, half a million Southern Baptists (at least) are now Masons — including many Southern Baptist pastors, ministers of education, deacons, and directors of missions.57 But even if there were ten million Christians in the Lodge, this fact alone would not justify Masonry. I can only agree with the conclusion of the Presbyterian report and many others that say:

a) Joining Masonry requires "actions and vows out of accord with Scripture."

b) "Participation in Masonry seriously compromises the Christian faith and testimony."

c) "Membership in Masonry and activity in its Ritual lead to a diluting of commitment to Christ and His kingdom."58

Certainly the Baptist stress on individual freedom of conscience cannot be carried so far as to accept the right of Christians to join the Mormon church or the Baha'i Faith. On what basis, then, can the Southern Baptist Convention say it is permissible for a Christian to join the Masonic Lodge? The issue is not individual conscience. The issue is, Can Christianity and Masonry be logically joined together without violation of scriptural teaching and Christ's glory? If not, then the verdict of each Christian's conscience must be to abstain from the Masonic Lodge, and the obligation of each church body must be to proclaim this basic incompatibility of Masonry and Christianity.
 
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
THE MASONIC LODGE AND THE CHRISTIAN CONSCIENCE
by John Weldon
Click to expand...
A piece already thoroughly refuted before, verifying the earlier statement that antimasons simply ignore all refutations of their theories as though they never happened. The posting of this one also reveals:

TACTIC #10: Posting lengthy posts, or numerous posts in rapid succession, in an attempt to bury information they don't want anyone to see.

Obviously with no way to counter the last post, the burying tactic has been immediately employed. But it's easy to see things were going downhill for you long before that, with no counters either, for:

Why no pattern of evil behavior follows from the accusations of evil Masons.

The definition in 1st John of how to tell those of faith from other people.

Why there are no figures to back up claims of what "the majority" of Christians believe.

Why so many of this country's founders were solid Christians and yet were also Masons.

(Of course, a weak reply was offered, dealing with how many Masons did or did not sign the Declaration, which says absolutely nothing about anything. The key issue is, exactly who the Masons were who were involved.

And so you had people involved at the heart of things, who were Masons. Signing the Declaration was not the only event of significance in early American History. There were Masons like Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Paul Revere, George Washington, and many others. They were not just responsible for signing the Declaration, they also gave a strong Christian mooring to this country.

 
Upvote 0
C

cwebber

Guest
If Freemasonry is such a "good" organization, then why does the vast majority of Christendom find it abhorrent to the fundamental teachings of the historic Christian faith?
Click to expand...

Maybe you can help me out with another issue hear Mike.

Why do some churches not allow the following because they think it is evil:
Drums
Electric Guitars
Horns
Wind Insturments
Childern Services
Chinese
Blacks
Whites
Divorced Couples
NIV Bibles
NLV Bibles
Mixed Couples


Just because a Churches Traditions does not allow something does not mean it is Evil, Bibliclly Freemaosnry is not Evil

In your Opnion it is, But that is your opnion based on Traditions of Fundimentlist Preachers such as John Ankerburg who teaches that Blacks will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. Because He stands with Progressive Creationist Teachings which state that Adam was created over 40000 yrs ago by God. Ethopians date back futher than that according to mans dating method. The Bible states that Salvation is only for the descendants of Adam. Accroding the the Doctrine on which Ankerburg stands You my friend would not be a descendant of Adam if you are from Ethopia or that area and would not be able to receive Salvation. Thank God the Bible disagrees with Ankerburg.

But yet you will stand with Him.
 
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
John Weldon, “The Masonic Lodge and the Christian Conscience”





the Southern Baptists are perhaps the only conservative Christian denomination in America not to warn their constituents that membership in the Masonic Lodge is not compatible with biblical teaching.
Click to expand...



Oops! I think he forgot the United Methodists. At the grassroots level, where most of us are, we are conservative. Last General Conference, with several votes pending on homosexual issues, and with an expectant press corps anxious to report the turnaround some were expecting, got an unexpected rebuff as all votes taken on homosexual issues were voted against by margins of no less than 80%, and in some cases it was 90%. Granted, that’s not the only issue on which one may determine a conservative viewpoint, but in most denominations, it’s the linchpin.



Proof of Masonry's false gospel can be found in standard "Monitors"
Click to expand...




Well, I’ve shown enough times that purity of life and conduct, if one examines Christian teaching from both the OT and NT, certainly is necessary to enter the realm of God, who is “too pure to look upon sin.”

“But that means we need the righteousness of Christ,” is the first objection someone will raise, as if Christian Masons were ignorant of that and were trying to “earn” their way in. But the fact is, a Christian Mason will not think otherwise, and besides, the ritual has changed over the years and no longer reflects the direct mention of the Savior that it once contained within the same statement quoted above. The original reading was:






Things were easier in the old days before all the esoterics and such came in and tried to “clean things up” by removing Christian references. Put back into the original forms, they read much more user-friendly for Christians.



Weldon also quotes Jim Tresner on the issue of “works salvation”:



But Masonry also teaches that individuals may be saved by being good members of their respective religions
Click to expand...
— whether Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Jewish, or other. For example, Dr. Jim Tresner, director of the Masonic Leadership Institute, affirmed that Masonry "leaves the member to devote himself to his own religious faith to receive...salvation
Click to expand...




Hey, there’s one of those little ellipsis thingies again. Shall we investigate? Sure, but this time we only find three little words left out. But there is also material at the beginning of the sentence which was relevant, as we shall see:





In other words, it’s the same old statement about that choice not being up to one’s Lodge, which has been the Masonic position all along. But Weldon felt it necessary to chop off part of the sentence, which gives a different spin to the reading of it. And why those three little words left out of that last sentence?



That’s easy. He is trying his best to prove “salvation by works,” and simply wanted to remove any mention of “grace” out of the equation, lest someone see the truth and he be exposed.



Weldon quotes Joseph Fort Newton from an article in the Masonic Bible titled “The Great Light of Masonry”:






I don’t know what Masonic Bible that came out of, but it certainly isn’t in mine, which is a 1991 edition. Perhaps they wisely recognized that this is not an issue finding agreement among Masons, and simply removed it.



Weldon quotes Carl Claudy on the subject of who God is:





For this one let’s go back just a bit before the beginning point chosen by Weldon, and add a bit at the end as well as flesh out the ellipsis:





Man, that’s quite a difference when you look at all Claudy said surrounding the precious little of it Weldon quoted. He forgot to mention that Claudy considered God the “warp and woof of Masonry.” He left out the part about Masonry having nothing left if you remove God. He didn’t mention the part about Masonry having such reverence for God that it speaks in terms of “God” very little, much like Jews will not pronounce the sacred name. And it’s easy to see from the context that the butchered “quote” he had to offer was a complete falsehood in what it appears to declare.

Now watch the next one closely—for in this example you will find one of the most vicious of lies, created in the same manner as those we have been examining. Weldon “quotes” from Albert Pike’s Morals and Dogma:

if our conceptions of God are those of the ignorant, narrow-minded, and vindictive Israelite...we feel that it is an affront and an indignity to [God]...."
Click to expand...

Did I see that right? He just accused Albert Pike of anti-Semitism. Is he right? Take a look at the context of the remark:




His interpretation of what he has just created is that Pike “denies the biblical God.” This is just pure slaughter of another’s meaning, and is uncalled for, out of order, and as horrendous an example of intellectual dishonesty, I daresay, as you will find anywhere. The first part of Weldon’s “quote” was preceded by a clear statement predicating the remark upon, “If we of the 19th century after Christ, adopt the conceptions of the 19th century before Him….” So the “narrow-minded, vindictive Israelite he spoke of was the Israelite of 38 centuries ago! Certainly conceptions of God were more primitive in that time, no one would dispute that. His point is that our conception of God should always be the highest we are capable of conceiving, and conceptions of God that are 38 centuries old just may be inaccurate.

The second part of Weldon’s quote is just gross manipulation, and there is no excuse for it in any field of endeavor, no matter what the circumstances. He has taken a phrase from the beginning of a sentence that was unrelated, and tacked it on the end of an ellipsis as if it were a continuation of the first thought. But Pike was saying “We feel it is an affront and an indignity to Him” to attribute negative and unworthy qualities to the God of our conception, such as being “cruel, capricious, and unjust.”

Maybe somebody somewhere can find an excuse for what Weldon has done with this, I can’t see a single thing to justify such hijacking and manipulation. The scary part of it: with an internet first publication in 1994, it has been around for 11 years now, and still remains.

But now watch the subtle shift Weldon pulls with the concepts he has miscast by manipulating Pike’s text:


Weldon takes the ideas he deliberately turned into a lie about the Israelites and their God, and simply applies it across the board to become a blameable statement about the Christian God. Then he substitutes instead of what “Pike said,” the idea that “Masonry denies that the God of the Bible is the one true God.” And thus he comes full circle by creating one outright lie, then making it apply to Christians by subtle little changes in the case he has set forth. That’s quite a deft little move, one even ole Slewfoot himself would be proud of.



How can this man conduct such subtlety and outright deception, and even begin to think he fights for some cause of God? I would hope that any Christian who sees this kind of deception would have nothing to do with it.



Weldon claims to be conservative. Many conservative churches have an emphasis on WWJD—“What Would Jesus Do?”



Would Jesus take someone’s words, twist them around, omit over half of them, making a totally different statement out of them, and then go spreading that lie across a public medium like the internet, so that it becomes a worldwide lie?

I don’t think so.

 
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
The most well-known effort coming from this pair is The Secret Teachings of the Masonic Lodge, from Moody Press, first published in 1989. A lot could be said here, but not a lot is necessary if anyone will consider checking the information posted at the following link, a chapter of a book published by Art DeHoyos and S. Brent Morris, Is it True What They Say About Freemasonry?



http://www.srmason-sj.org/web/SRpublications/DeHoyos.htm



This is a very thorough work on the subject of anti-Masonry, and devotes the entire second chapter to Ankerberg and Weldon. One notation they make is that while Albert Pike is one of the least-recommended Masonic authors, according to a survey they presented to several Grand Lodges, he is quoted just as often in their criticism of Masonry as is Henry Coil, one of the most-recommended. The credibility and balance of what they present are thus seen as suspect.



But there are far greater reasons than that to read their book with caution. They represent some of their sources as “former Masons,” when actually they were never Masons at all. One such source is Scotch Rite Masonry Illustrated, by Jonathan Blanchard, which is quoted extensively throughout the book. Of this source, they say:



.
Click to expand...




Some “exposure.” There are a lot of people who do not even distinguish, or are not even aware, that there are a lot of such pseudo-Masonic groups around who are in no way representative of what true Freemasonry is about. Besides those, there are others who are similar in some ways but are not connected with the true Masonic groups that are descended from and affiliated with the United Grand Lodge of England, considered the “Mother Lodge” of true Freemasonry. Groups not recognized by the UGLE are generally referred to as “clandestine” or “irregular.”



But beyond that criticism, there are claims made about Blanchard and others that are simply untrue:



That would be cause enough for raised eyebrows—but it gets worse than that.



The book in question just happens to be one of the first books on Masonry that I ever purchased, and has been in my personal library for quite some time, probably since it was first published. I have the 1990 expanded Moody Press edition. And so it contains the original claims just as they were first set forth. In this edition, Blanchard is described as the



former president of Wheaton College, who was a former Sovereign Grand Commander and 33rd Degree Mason.



And it doesn’t stop there. Just below that claim they also make the statement



Masonic leader Jim Shaw was a 33rd Degree Mason, a Past Worshipful Master of the Blue Lodge, Past Master of all Scottish Rite bodies, and a Knight Commander of the Court of Honor.



Jim Shaw, it turns out, was indeed a Mason, but never held any of the titles he claimed, not the 33rd degree, not the Master even of any Lodge, much less “all Scottish Rite bodies,” and not a Knight Commander. He merits an entire chapter (Chapter 5) in DeHoyos’ book also.



Even so, with the amended versions of their book, they still continued to quote Blanchard’s book as some kind of authority on the subject, as though nothing ever happened.



John Weldon has a more recent piece that has been published on the internet, “The Masonic Lodge and the Christian Conscience.” It has been published by the Christian Research Institute, first in the Winter 1994 issue of Christian Research Journal. The piece is excerpted mainly from a work published by Ankerberg and Weldon, Bowing at Strange Altars. Within the article, Weldon quotes from various Masonic sources. These quotes are rather selective, and when reading through the piece, one quirk of the quotes is immediately apparent: most of them contain certain omissions, indicated by ellipses. This is a standard method of representing where portions of text are omitted. The general expectation of the use of this tool is that it be done for brevity or for clarity. But an investigation of the original sources he quotes from reveals a different use that has been made of them. For instance, he offers the following quote from Albert Pike’s Morals and Dogma:



Albert Pike also denies the biblical God. He argues that "if our conceptions of God are those of the ignorant, narrow-minded, and vindictive Israelite...we feel that it is an affront and an indignity to [God]...."



But the “quote” reads quite differently when placed in the proper context in which Pike wrote it:



For every man's conception of God must vary with his mental
cultivation and mental powers. If any one contents himself with
any lower image than his intellect is capable of grasping, then he
contents himself with that which is false to him, as well as false in
fact. If lower than he can reach, he must needs feel it to be false.
And if we, of the nineteenth century after Christ, adopt the con-
ceptions of the nineteenth century before Him; if our conceptions
of God are those of the ignorant, narrow-minded, and vindictive
Israelite; then we think worse of God, and have a lower, meaner,
and more limited view of His nature, than the faculties which He
has bestowed are capable of grasping. The highest view we can
form is nearest to the truth. If we acquiesce in any lower one,
we acquiesce in an untruth. We feel that it is an affront and an
indignity to Him, to conceive of Him as cruel, short-sighted, ca-
pricious, and unjust; as a jealous, an angry, a vindictive Being.
When we examine our conceptions of His character, if we can
conceive of a loftier, nobler, higher, more beneficent, glorious, and
magnificent character, then this latter is to us the true conception
of Deity; for nothing can be imagined more excellent than He. (P. 223)



I put Weldon’s selected portions in normal text and the rest in bold red print to show the contrast. Notice how the first phrase is lifted out and treated as though it begins the sentence in Weldon’s appropriation of it; and the second, which begins the sentence, is treated as though it completes the thought of the first phrase he lifted out. In actuality, though, the two are not connected at all in Pike’s use of them.



What difference does it make? Taken the way Weldon has mischaracterized it, the reader is led to surmise that Pike was an anti-Semite in the worst sort of way. Taken the way Pike intended it, we find that the “ignorant, narrow-minded, vindictive” Israelite conceptions he speaks of are those of the Israelite of the Bible, or “nineteen centuries before Christ.” That’s the first falsehood, accusing Pike, and all Masons by association, of anti-Semitism. The other falsehood is the connection of the second phrase with the first, making it appear as though Masons are not only prejudicial, but that they also consider God to approve of their supposed prejudice. This is done by making the “affront to God” appear to be connected to the “ignorant” conceptions of the Israelites. But in truth, what Pike has said is, if we think of God as cruel, unjust, vindictive, and capricious, then we consider such an opinion to be an “affront to God.” Weldon’s misuse of this literary device, then, has clearly miscast Pike’s intended meaning. But it does not stop there. He quotes another line from Pike almost immediately behind that one:





Once again, he begins in mid-sentence, and the ellipsis also indicates he has omitted material from the end of the sentence also. In its original context, the quote reads:





So in reality, Pike was only addressing the fact that even at our best efforts at expressing the attributes of God, we still see “through a glass, darkly” as Paul put it, “only in part” as Pike put it, and because of that, if idolatry truly consists in “substituting a feeble and temporary idea” in place of the True God, then every religion you can conceive of is idolatrous, because none of them has the ability to express God completely. That’s very different than what Weldon has sought to portray, that Pike has attacked the God of Scripture as “a false god and an idol.” He has done no such thing, Pike in fact attacks not God, but our incomplete conceptions of Him.



There is much more that could be said of this Weldon article, and of Ankerberg and Weldon’s work in other regards. But these should be sufficient to point to a trail of misrepresentation, and one which is apparently intentional. Readers of anything they have to offer are cautioned to read with an awareness of the potential for such deceptive practices, and take what they say with skepticism. The question quite naturally arises with their work, as with anyone else who seeks to make the same case they do:

If they are purporting to be revealing the “truth about Freemasonry” as they claim, then why should they have to resort to such deception themselves to make their case?
 
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
Interesting:

There is a link to the article on Mike's fishy website, under the "why" question that is part of the main heading on the homepage. So there is one person whose answer to "why" just happens to be, "Because I read Ankerberg and Weldon."

And considering a false accusation that gets tossed about rather often concerning the Lodge, you could go a step further and say they are "teaching a false gospel," since the entire foundation on which they supposedly "defend" the Bible is not built on the truth in Jesus Christ, but some other foundation.
So with the current exposition of the deliberately false nature of Ankerberg and Weldon's work, we now know the real answer to the "why" question for Finnell is, "Because I bought into an antimason lie."
 
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
From another thread:

And that makes two now who owe their sudden change of direction to the subtle inventions of a crafty antimason. And apparently his conscience is just as seared as Mr. Ankerberg, because he has expressed unmitigated support for some theories created by Mr. Ankerberg which have been proven to be deliberately manufactured falsehoods. Why would any Christian deliberately support a professed Christian who creates a deliberate lie for the sole purpose of using it to slander someone?
 
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
Well, to an extent I'd agree. But Mike seems perfectly capable of creating his own web. For example, consider the following critique of a piece from his website titled:

"Why Our Ministry is so Critically Important"
http://www.fish4masons.org/why/important.html





“’Some’ religious leaders,” eh? I’d say there are more than you seem willing to acknowledge—not excepting my own denomination, of course, but with our latest quadrennial conference, we seem to have turned somewhat of a corner.
​
​
Drawing parallels between the Lodge and the Church? My, how novel. But what a shame that you only seem to do that when you find things you wish to be negative about.


But then you come in on the next paragraph with:



Christians of this modern-day era fail miserably in thinking and acting biblically.
Click to expand...




And in the next paragraph after that you claim:





So, how can Christians “fall victim” when they have already “failed miserably?” Aren’t you rather confused?



​
​
But you seem to have missed an important detail: this is yet another Lodge/Church parallel you could have noted. ​




Looks like Coil’s suggestion that the two are closely linked is right on target. The fortunes of one rise or fall with the other.



​
​
Wow, yet another parallel. Our church here has become aware of our need to grow, and all the above things were brought up in our planning sessions. ​


This is really incredible. It was pointed out in our meetings that the hardline statistics are, that 85% of people who don’t accept Christ by the age of 18, never will. Thus we see it as imperative that we target young people, sponsor more youth activities, and bring them in so we can “program their minds” into Christianity so they will remain when they become adults.
​


Most churches have cut down on the meeting times, moving from a former trend of 3 services a week, to one Sunday morning service. Thus they can create more Christians in the shortest period of time. What used to be months of teaching of baptism/confirmation candidates has been cut down to weeks.



Lack of membership generally means a lack of financial resources that typically come in the form of annual dues. As a result, many lodges have had to merge or form an amalgamation of sorts in order to stay alive.
Click to expand...


Wow, the same has happened with the decline in tithers. Many churches in our denomination have had to go for the first time from being a “station” church to being part of a charge of two or more churches served by one pastor.



​
​
That sounds very close to what we already have in our church, where people who do not choose membership may opt for being an “associate member,” with similar restrictions. But I wouldn’t count on that idea of a Wedge developing, because I have found that a lot of people prefer the associate membership route because it means less involvement, as they cannot hold church office.​
Finally, the most important reason why our ministry must prevail is the biblical mandate from God:
Click to expand...
​
​
​
Now this is hard to believe. I’m used to your ellipses when quoting Masons, but when quoting Scripture, you feel the need to censor???​
But on reading the NIV you quoted from and getting the omissions, it is understandable what picture you were trying to portray.
​
“They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign Lord."
Click to expand...
Just couldn’t quite bring yourself to accuse Masons of being “godless” men, nor of “changing the grace of God into a license for immorality,” either. That’s easy to understand, since they require belief in God up-front, and since by definition they are a “system of morality.”
But isn’t it rather hypocritical to do this on the one hand, while on the other hand accusing Masons of mishandling Scripture?

​
​
And yet once more, the internet has become quite a medium for Christian apologetics.​
​
​
Maybe you can explain for me exactly what value you see in “slanderous offensive nonsense” that you would speak in its defense?​
We recognized that the battleground of Satan is the hearts and minds of mankind. He will do anything and use anything, including Freemasonry, to triumph over Christians and to keep non-believers from ever accepting Jesus Christ.

​
Click to expand...
​
​
​
Perhaps so. But he just as often, or perhaps even more often, since they come in greater numbers, he simply uses Christians. ​
​
​
​
Now we have you offering us the confusing prospect of an organization known for its non-recruitment stance, which yet has a “target.” Does that mean you’re concerned that Christians will be our targets for non-recruitment?​
The more I see of your stuff, the bizarrer you get.
​
 
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
Thanks for promoting our web site Rev. Wayne!
Click to expand...

It's no surprise, really, that someone who can't distinguish between a religion and a fraternity would not be able to distinguish between PROmotion and DEmotion.

[sign]It's nothing, really![/sign]​
​
​
 
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:
I don't really think He was trying to promte it just showing how thw Lies and deliberate miss quotes and false information that John Weldonm and John Ankerburg has put out has caused you to stumble and fall. By believing the Lie!
Click to expand...
No Corey, it really shows how "Christian" Masons like you and "the Rev" have fallen for Satan's lies and deceptions that have been conveniently wrapped in the deception of this insidious thing called Freemasonry.

John Weldon and John Ankerburg are both highly regarded in the evangelical world. So is D. L. Moody, Jonathan Blanchard, Charles Blanchard, Alva McClain, Walter Martin, and Charles Finney; all of whom have taken positions against and have denounced the Masonic Lodge.

Do you think these denominations and their leaders would establish official position statements against an organization based on misinformation? If so, then you are more naive then I thought. Do you think they relied solely on the quotes of Masonic proponents provided by the anti-masonic movement that may have included ellipses? If so, you are more gullible then I thought. Do you think that some readers of this thread have not carefully examined Rev. Wayne's explanation of the missing portions of some of these quotes, yet don't have enough spiritual discernment to still conclude that the teachings of Freemasonry are NOT compatible with biblical Christianity? If so, then you have been more easily duped by its teachings then I even imagined.

What Masons fail to realize is that, no matter how much you or Wayne or any other defender of the Masonic faith supply ALL the "missing" information omitted by the use of ellipses, you are not going to convince most people that anyone has lied about Freemasonry. As I pointed out, by 'filling in the blanks' all you and Wayne are doing is confirming what has already been determined in the first place without the added information. Many prominent Christians are also prominent academics who teach at prominent Christian seminaries and have written books about the biblical incompatibility of the religious cult called Freemasonry. They know the rules of the use of ellipses and would not be able to have their work published by the prominent Christian publishing companies that they use if they didn't follow them or misquoted anyone.

The bottom-line is when Wayne, or anyone else for that matter, provides what they think is a "misquote" or a Masonic quote deemed as taken "out-of-context" folks can see that even after the additional information is supplied, it really doesn't change what was provided by the anti-masonic source in the first place. You and Wayne are wasting your time, because the fact remains that most Christians and Christian denominations denouce your insidious secret society, and they do so for good reasons. You, Wayne and all other so-called "Christian" Masons have fallen for Satan's Masonic trap, hook, line and sinker. And, now you must face the consequences. However, there is hope of you avoiding some of them if you would only repent and come out from among them.

P.S. I say so-called "Christian" Masons not to question your faith, but to question your allegiance to Jesus Christ. "Why?" you may ask, because I am of the firm conviction that the idea of "Christian Mason" is an oxymoron and any Christian who knows both sides of the issues against Freemasonry as much as you and Wayne do, are in a place no one should want to be in, that is -- in deliberate rebellion against Almighty God.
 
Upvote 0
C

cwebber

Guest

Mike
It has already been proven by Facts that these men intitually lied about Freemasonry we have the facts to back it up. Yet you contuine to follow them blindly. Blanchard as been proven wrong, based His material on a clandestian group not regular freemasonry, Ankerburg and Weldon both knew this and still quoted Him. D. L. Moody so far as I know never really studied Freemasonry mostly he seen one or two masons acting stupid and formed an opnion on them all based on the few. Charles Finey had many, many things wrong about the Bible it is possible that He had Freemaosnry wrong as well. Fell for the same lies that you have fallen for Mike.

All I ask is that you honestly look at Freemaosnry not based on the lies and deseptions of Ankerburg and Weldon who knowingly used informatin they knew did not pretain the regular Freemasonry.

Blindly following Ankerburg and Weldon, I feel for you Mike because one day you will be held accountable for it and the answer will not be one you hope for.

Do you think these denominations and their leaders would establish official position statements against an organization based on misinformation?
Click to expand...

Yes I do and it would not be the first time that a Church would have made a Mistake. How many people were killed in the name of God due to a Officail statement of the Church. How many people were made Slaves because the Church officially said it was ok.

You tell me Mike wether the Church has ever mad mistakes based on false information, or would you rather us go back to the days of Salvery and oppression.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Are All Religions Different Paths Up the Same Mountain?
Replies
2
Views
377
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
Asia reminded me that life is about more than the carnal and secular...
Replies
1
Views
282
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
fide
  • Poll
The Seven Mountains Mandate or Dominionism?
Replies
36
Views
2K
Controversial Christian Theology
bèlla
Cardinal Sarah: Too Often in the West, Religion is Presented as an Activity
Replies
0
Views
87
One Bread, One Body - Catholic
Michie
K
Regarding the origin of the body of Jesus Christ
Replies
16
Views
907
Controversial Christian Theology
KolQoreBaMidbar
K
Menu
Log in
Register