It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christianity and Freemasonry

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Can people please stop quoting the Gospel of Thomas as the words of Christ. This book was found along with a load of other crazy Gnostic crap


Have you ever question why it is classed as gnostic, could be conspiracy to keep every in church and putting into the donation plate, just a thought?


Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

quote: Are Freemasonry and Christianity incompatible?

Yes 1111
No 12930

It's a pity the BBC has chosen to have this poll. Surely it will further alienate people away from Masonry


I think it will have no effect at all, if anything it will have the reverse, seeing as the majority have the opinion the the two are not incompatible, which surely means they are compatible.




posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 05:10 AM
link   
Bondi...I guess we'll only find out when we're dead. It would be a real kick in the ass though if God tells me that I was wrong and the Gnostics were right all along.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Masonic Light...see heres the thing...if Zoroastrianism and freemasonry have nothing in common then whats the deal with all the black and white dualistic nature of man thing that you got goin on in the lodge. If you read Pike he explicitly says that masonry is founded in the teachings of Zoroaster, Ahura Mazda(sp?), Kaballah and Egyptian deity worship. The myth of Hiram eludes to the story of the killing of Osirus. I think you probably already knew that.




Complete and utter speculation without a single foundation in fact.

Let me give you something else to chew over - there is even more so-called proof that Christianity stems from Egyptian religion and Zorastrianism. If you're such a good researcher you would have discovered this "fact".

As for Pike? It annoys me how everyone takes Pike as The Authority on Freemasonry. Outside of the US (where Freemasonry is a recent phenomena in comparison) hardly anyone has ever heard of him. Never forget that Pike was only giving his own opinion. He could not and did not speak for Freemasonry as a whole.

By the way - the dualistic nature of man can be found in nearly every religion. You can't tie it down to one.



[edit on 10-12-2004 by Leveller]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Every opinion in this forum is merely informed speculation (in most cases). A fact is something that can be proven beyond a doubt. I cannot prove beyond a doubt that freemasonry is founded in ancient mystery religion, Im merely giving my informed speculative opinion.

Pike, from what I can remember was responsible for the reworking of most of the old Scottish Rite format. Saying he's not an authority on freemasonry is like saying Joseph Smith was not an authority on Mormonism. Why is there a big statue on him on 3rd and D if he wasn't an important and infuential figure in an age that was dominated by freemasonry. Perhaps its there to commemerate him for his charitable work with southern black folk...I don't think so.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Theres a good argument that the Jewish religion, and the Christian one by default, stems from Akhenaten (the Father of King Tut ). He brought about the first monotheistic religion in history, as far as i am aware. He advocated the worship of one God, the Arten, to the exclusion of all others.
He wrote a Hymn to the Arten that has a very similar counter part in the Bible, i cant remember which one but I'm sure someone here will know.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Pike, from what I can remember was responsible for the reworking of most of the old Scottish Rite format.


Some one please put me right if I am wrong.

Freemasonry consists of 3 and only 3 degrees; -

Entered Apprentice
Fellow Craft
Master Mason

The York and Scottish Rite's are a voluntary thing undertaken by mason's. Compulsory, not mandatory.

In another light, as this is regarding Freemasonry and Christianity, the people who translate the bible, are they expert translators or experts in Christianity, I hope it is the first one else there may be a another organisation under the spotlight for conspiracy


I don't know if Pike did redo the Scottish Rite stuff, but if he did, it would not of been him who authorised it. This would of been done by the members of the Rite, no one person controls Freemasonry, it's views, directions or teachings. Freemasonry is about brotherhood not dictatorship, unlike other organisations that have a singular body at the top that decides the yes and no's by themself.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason, are the three degrees of fellow craft masonry. These degrees are normally skipped over in the States. Its much more popular in the UK to complete these degrees first. Scottish Rite freemasonry consists of the other 30 degrees above the blue lodge degrees and is refered to as further masonic light as with York Rite and all the other spin offs, shriners etc.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason, are the three degrees of fellow craft masonry. These degrees are normally skipped over in the States.


You cant be a mason without doing the 3 degrees ;puz: surely



Its much more popular in the UK to complete these degrees first.


You have to have done your 3 beofre you can enter the rite's, don't you?


Scottish Rite freemasonry consists of the other 30 degrees above the blue lodge degrees and is refered to as further masonic light as with York Rite and all the other spin offs, shriners etc.


What happened to the 32nd and 33rd everyone else keeps linking to every occult and NWO group they can think of


So are you saying the rites are a spin off , cause that mean they are not the same wouldn't it.

Could some one in Scottish or York Rite elaborate on this subject cause I think it is a case of two people talking about something they are not actually sure about.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by saint4God
Freemasonry is based on Jewish Kaballa?


No. The Kabalah is indeed important in the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, but is not even mentioned in the York Rite (at least not by name).

Secondly, it is not actually the Jewish Kabalah; the Christian Kabalah has influenced Masonry much more than the Jewish branch of the school, and it is possible that the influence of the Christian Kabalah is derived from the Rosicrucians, which was a fraternity of Christian mystics, composed of physicians and philosophers in 17th century Europe.


I'd gotten the impression from your previous post that this was the case. Thanks for actually answering my questions instead of saying "Someones not listening?" I was getting the impression from a previous poster that a lot of Masons were condescending. Anyway, I'm new to the term Christian Kabalah as well. Anyone who'd like to enlighten me (minus condescending remarks), it would be appreciated. Sorry to deflate the expectations of others that I know everything.

[edit on 10-12-2004 by saint4God]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 11:17 AM
link   
system malfunction

[edit on 10-12-2004 by billmcelligott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son

Pike, from what I can remember was responsible for the reworking of most of the old Scottish Rite format. Saying he's not an authority on freemasonry is like saying Joseph Smith was not an authority on Mormonism. Why is there a big statue on him on 3rd and D if he wasn't an important and infuential figure in an age that was dominated by freemasonry.



Your opinion is totally insular. Pike may have had some influence in the Southern states of the US but you seem to utterly forget that Freemasonry is worldwide and that at that time (and even now), the area in which Pike operated was populated with a tiny amount of Freemasons when compared with those outside of the Southern US. As I've already stated, ask any Freemason outside of the US who Albert Pike is, and the vast majority will never have heard of him - his writings certainly didn't and don't affect the way in which they practice their Freemasonry.
In fact, near enough the only way that anyone outside of the US will have come across Pike is by reading the internet, as he is the favourite target for the anti-mason and is used to justify any argument that they may have.

Your comparison with Joseph Smith is therefore totally unjustifiable as Pike was and is a minor figure in the worldwide fraternity of Masonry, whereas Smith was known internationally within Mormonism. It should also be noted that Freemasonry was around long before Pike was.
I don't denigrate Pike by stating these facts. I'm merely pointing out that he isn't half as important as most of those outside of the fraternity believe him to be. And certainly not to those outside of the US where Freemasonry has existed for much longer.
As for erecting a statue? There is a statue of Charles Dickens in London (even though he was born in Hampshire) - yet do you think he invented literature? No. He wrote good books and did good deeds, yet where is the conspiracy there? You wouldn't dream of saying that Dickens was the only influence of modern day literature or had the massive input that you so easily lay upon Pike shoulders, would you? Dickens was good at what he did yet literature was around before him and exists after him - the same goes for Pike.

Pike wrote his own opinion. Nothing more. It may be an opinion that is respected by many masons. Others may totally disagree with it. But it remains, nonetheless, an opinion.


[edit on 10-12-2004 by Leveller]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Sorry must be pressing the wrong buttons , will try harder in future?

[edit on 10-12-2004 by billmcelligott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
I'd gotten the impression from your previous post that this was the case. Thanks for actually answering my questions instead of saying "Someones not listening?" I was getting the impression from a previous poster that a lot of Masons were condescending. Anyway, I'm new to the term Christian Kabalah as well. Anyone who'd like to enlighten me (minus condescending remarks), it would be appreciated. Sorry to deflate the expectations of others that I know everything.

[edit on 10-12-2004 by saint4God]


These are just a few of many posts that are on ATS from masons, these are just on this thread.



No. The Kabalah is indeed important in the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite, but is not even mentioned in the York Rite (at least not by name).




Secondly, it is not actually the Jewish Kabalah; the Christian Kabalah has influenced Masonry much more than the Jewish branch of the school




Complete and utter speculation without a single foundation in fact.




As for Pike? It annoys me how everyone takes Pike as The Authority on Freemasonry. Outside of the US (where Freemasonry is a recent phenomena in comparison) hardly anyone has ever heard of him. Never forget that Pike was only giving his own opinion. He could not and did not speak for Freemasonry as a whole.


You then say



I was getting the impression from a previous poster that a lot of Masons were condescending.


Trying to be humourous is not Condescending, however the facts are facts.

Freemsonry is not a religion , kabbalictic or otherwise, ther may be some individual Masons who wish to make it such , however. Every Grand Lodge in the World clearly denied that it is:

United Grand Lodge of England:
Basic Statement

Freemasonry is not a religion, nor is it a substitute for religion. It demands of its members a belief in a Supreme Being but provides no system of faith of its own.

Freemasonry is open to men of all religious faiths. The discussion of religion at its meetings is forbidden.

For those Grand Lodges influenced by Albert Pikes 's writings :
Basic Principles. Freemasonry is not a religion, nor is it a substitute for religion. It requires of its members belief in God as part of the obligation of every responsible adult, but advocates no sectarian faith or practice. Masonic ceremonies include prayers, both traditional and extempore, to reaffirm each individual's dependence on God and to seek divine guidance. Freemasonry is open to men of any faith, but religion may not be discussed at Masonic meetings.

Albert Himself:
Morals and Dogma
Bro. Pike states unequivocally that Masonry is not a religion;
he also states the importance of prayer, in contradiction to the
charge that Pike considered the Deity unreachable.
On p. 220 of the same text, Pike states: "But it (Freemasonry) is
neither a political party nor a religious sect. It embraces all
parties and all sects, to form from among them a vast fraternal
association. It recognizes the dignity of human nature, and man's
right to such freedom as he is fitted for; and it knows nothing that
should place one man below another, except ignorance, debasement, and
crime, and the necessity of subordination to lawful will and
authority."
most explicitly, on p. 161, Pike says: "Masonry is not a
religion. He who makes of it a religious belief, falsifies and
denaturalizes it."



Further to press home my point :
Mackey

Albert G. Mackey, M.D., agreed with Bro. Pike. On p. 846-847 of his
"Encyclopedia of Freemasonry," Bro. Mackey states: "Now we have never
for a moment believed that any such unwarrantable assumption, as that
Freemasonry is intended to be a substitute for Christianity, could
ever obtain admission into any well-regulated mind...Freemasonry is
not Christianity, nor a substitute for it. It is not intended to
supercede it nor any other form of worship or system of faith."

and:
Coil
"In closing this dissertation on an important subject, one on which opinions may differ widely, it must be concluded that no matter how filled we may be with religious fervor, we must give up any idea that Freemasonry was intended to be another religious sect and that, containing as it does a large proportion of men who have already espoused some church or denomination, any such career would be plagued by internal discord or submerged in the large number of existing sects. On the other hand, Freemasonry, as a universal moral society open to all men of good report and intentions, has performed and will continue to perform a valuable and necessary function in the world." - Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, 1961 , p. 522.



On occasion instead of a gentle prod , one has to use a sledge hammer.



[edit on 10-12-2004 by billmcelligott]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason, are the three degrees of fellow craft masonry. These degrees are normally skipped over in the States. Its much more popular in the UK to complete these degrees first. Scottish Rite freemasonry consists of the other 30 degrees above the blue lodge degrees and is refered to as further masonic light as with York Rite and all the other spin offs, shriners etc.


Not quite, you have to attain Master mason in all Countires to be allowed and further involvment in other dregrees, i think Mark Master Mason is based on the second or fellow Craft degree.

The UK does have additional degrees up to 33rd. But no Masons is superior to a Master Mason.

i would not say these degress are skipped over in the States , it depends on which order you attend , but the basic degrees I would hope are admired by all Freemasons the world over. Check with your Grand Lodge web sitews I am confident they will agree . That the Third Degree is not infereior in any way to any other degree. The number of a degree is not a badge of any pecking order.


UK, we refer to Entered Aprentice (1st Degree) Fellowcraft ( 2nd degree) Master Mason ( 3rd Degree). You must complete these degrees before joining any other order. for example if you join Rose X , you will jump to 18th degree. It does not make you a better Mason or superior in any way, it just means you have joined Rose X. and so on.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janus
Theres a good argument that the Jewish religion, and the Christian one by default, stems from Akhenaten (the Father of King Tut ). He brought about the first monotheistic religion in history, as far as i am aware. He advocated the worship of one God, the Arten, to the exclusion of all others.
He wrote a Hymn to the Arten that has a very similar counter part in the Bible, i cant remember which one but I'm sure someone here will know.


Now I liked this idea, I saw an old film called

'The Egyptian' www.gamecaravan.com...

which had this in its theme. Egyptians worshiping the Sun God Arten , then the ArkenArten suddenly realising that it was not the Sun that was God but the sun was just a symbol of what God was and that he was in all things the one supreme and infinite being.

This of course would mean that God was around 1500 years before exodus and trying his best to educate us stupid mortals. This made a lot of sense to me.

It could also explain how the Isrealites were of a one God religion at Exodus. That would leave only one major question . Were the Egyptian Arten worshiper influenced by the Isrealites or were the Isrealites influenced by the Egyptians?



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Bill, I've looked at this subject in the past and it's a very interesting one as you state.
But the answer may be mundane, a little disappointing and down to nothing more than politics.

At the time of Akhenaten, most of Egypt's power had been devolved to the priests. With the hundreds of deities on offer, the priests had become more powerful than the Pharoah himself. It's quite possible and has been suggested that Akhenaten scrapped all gods except one so that he could claim back all political power. By only having one god, the pharoah became the direct link between deity and people and the priests were relegated.

Akhenaten's previous behaviour would seem to suggest this. In a previous attempt to grab power and rewrite history, he had every record of his father's rule destroyed whenever he came across it.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
Anyway, I'm new to the term Christian Kabalah as well. Anyone who'd like to enlighten me (minus condescending remarks), it would be appreciated.


The history of the Kabalah itself is sort of shrouded in mystery; historians have made educated guesses, but these are still only guesses.

It is usually agreed that the doctrines that eventually became the Kabalah were first organized Hellenistic Jewish scholars, probably in Alexandria and other Egyptian cities. Here, Jews first became acquainted with classical Greek philosophy, and began assimilating the ideas of Socrates, Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Xenophanes, and Plotinus with their own traditional Jewish beliefs.

An unbiased study of the Jewish Kabalah indicates an attempt to reconcile Neo-Platonism with Judaism. For example, traditional Judaism (i.e., the religion of the Old Testament), doesn't consider the existence of an immortal soul. Adam is told "Dust thou art and unto dust thou shalt return", and when David died, he simply "slept with his fathers".

The Greek philosophers, on the other hand, taught that we each have souls, and that these souls are immortal. This doctrine is reflected in the Jewish Kabalah.

The Christian Kabalah actually began, in a sense, with the writings of the New Testament, although it was only during the Renaissance that the term "Christian Kabalah" was coined. For example, the New Testament, which was originally written in Greek, contain many paralells to Plato's thought, especially the continued use of the word "Logos" in the Gospel of John.

But it was only immediately following the High Middle Ages that Gentile Christians became seriously interested in the Kabalah, and formulated a purely Christian version. Many did so in an effort to "prove" the truths of Christianity; for example, the Sephira called Tiphareth in the Kaballah is identical with Plato's Logos; it is situated immediately between Malkuth (the Kingdom of the physical world) and Kether (the kingdom of of the Absolute). This sephira is attributed to Gold and the Sun, and therefore, also the Son. Therefore, since one must pass Tiphareth from Malkuth in order to enter Kether, this "proves" the maxim that the Father may only be reached through Christ.

If you are interested in learning more about the Christian Kabalah, Christian mysticism, and Rosicrucianism, I would recommend a visit to the online Rosicrucian library:

www.crcsite.org...

Also, visit the High Council of the Masonic Rosicrucian Society here:

www.yorkrite.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
their URL if you would like to brush up on a few FACTS yourself


Masonic Light...see heres the thing...if Zoroastrianism and freemasonry have nothing in common then whats the deal with all the black and white dualistic nature of man thing that you got goin on in the lodge.


I didn't say that Masonry and Zoroastrianism had nothing in common; I said that Masonry was not based upon Zoroastrianism, which you originally asserted.


If you read Pike he explicitly says that masonry is founded in the teachings of Zoroaster, Ahura Mazda(sp?), Kaballah and Egyptian deity worship. The myth of Hiram eludes to the story of the killing of Osirus. I think you probably already knew that.


To begin with, Pike also says that Christianity is a successor to Zoroastrianism, Egyptian mythology, and the Kabalah also. Was Pike correct? I can't say for certain that he was, but a good many of anthropologists, including the famed Frazer, have agreed with him, saying also that the story of Christ alludes to Osiris.

However, Pike never expressly states a belief that either Christianity, Freemasonry, or anything else were "founded" on those things. He simply pointed out the similarities, which are many, and invited his readers to draw their own conclusions. And although there are many similarities, Pike also spoke of the many differences.



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by nimrods son
Every opinion in this forum is merely informed speculation (in most cases). A fact is something that can be proven beyond a doubt. I cannot prove beyond a doubt that freemasonry is founded in ancient mystery religion, Im merely giving my informed speculative opinion.


I believe we have a disagreement concerning the Ancient Mysteries. In reality, they were not "religions". The "religions" were those practiced by practically everyone in the community; for example, ancient Egyptians practiced Osirianism, the Greeks worshiped Zeus, the Jews and Christians worshiped Yahweh, etc. These were not "mysteries", they were the common religious beliefs.

The Mysteries, on the other hand, were philosophical and scientific much more so than religious. They often used common religious symbols to exemplify their teachings, but these teachings were different than the common religions. Consider the case of Socrates, who had been initiated into the Mysteries of Eleusis. When he began publicly proclaiming the Mysteries, teaching them to his philosophy students, he was condemned to death for corrupting the young by the Athenian government for and teaching "atheism". His "atheism" consisted of his teaching that the gods were only symbols of natural scientific laws and forces, and that Zeus had no literal existence in the phenomenal world. This was a doctrine of the Ancient Mysteries, not the ancient religions. And if we consider what happened to Socrates, it isn't difficult to determine why the Mysteries were practiced in secret, and were "mysterious" to outsiders.


Pike, from what I can remember was responsible for the reworking of most of the old Scottish Rite format.


Pike re-wrote the degree rituals for the Scottish Rite's Southern Jurisdiction USA, of which I too am a member. Here, Pike's influence in the Rite is great. In other Jurisdictions, he had little or no influence at all.


Why is there a big statue on him on 3rd and D if he wasn't an important and infuential figure in an age that was dominated by freemasonry. Perhaps its there to commemerate him for his charitable work with southern black folk...I don't think so.


Pike's statue does not mention Freemasonry...only that he was a scholar, soldier, philosopher, poet, and philanthropist. As to your remark about "southern black folk", it should be remembered that it was Pike who introduced the original bill in the Confederate Congress that would end the slave trade, and free all slaves in Confederate territory over a period of 10 years. Pike himself had long freed the slaves he had inherited from his father-in-law, and afterward had given them employment.

[edit on 10-12-2004 by Masonic Light]



posted on Dec, 10 2004 @ 01:42 PM
link   
that was the information I was looking for. Not a fan of mysticism myself, but appreciate someone taking the time to explain how it works.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join