Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

A question for Masonic Light and other Masons

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Osirisrisen


A Mason can't be trusted when confronted by a non-member. The secrets are to be concealed and not revealed.



That really has nothing to do with trustworthiness. If a non-Mason asked me to reveal the secrets of Masonry, I would simply tell him that they can only be revealed during initiation into the fraternity, and if he really wants to learn them, I'll submit his petition. That is being both trustworthy and honest.

Since Masons have taken formal vows to practice the Moral Law, including the inculcation of Truth, it would seem to me that a Mason can technically be more trusted than those who have not made a similar vow.




posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Skadi the elf says:

"...some ignorant inbred turd off the street ..."

Hey! I resemble that remark!!



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I am not a Mason and therefore I have no personal stake in their defence, but isn't our motto here 'deny ignorance?'

I personally use ATS as a learning tool. I see something here which makes me wonder, so I go out and research it and learn something new. If I display ignorance, I would hope that someone here would point it out so that I have the opportunity to go out into the world and search for the truth.
Likewise, if I see someone else displaying ignorance I must point it out and give them the same opportunity.

Why shouldn't we all do the same? Why shouldn't Masons respond to our ignorance? Now you can call this rushing to defend Masonry, I look at it like helping to deny ignorance.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 12:25 PM
link   



That really has nothing to do with trustworthiness. If a non-Mason asked me to reveal the secrets of Masonry, I would simply tell him that they can only be revealed during initiation into the fraternity, and if he really wants to learn them, I'll submit his petition. That is being both trustworthy and honest.

Since Masons have taken formal vows to practice the Moral Law, including the inculcation of Truth, it would seem to me that a Mason can technically be more trusted than those who have not made a similar vow.


This is left for each individual Mason to answer. There is no general consensus on how to respond to this. It is much like if someone were asking me personal questions about myself. I could answer truthfully and provide information to a total stranger, I could tell them it's none of their business, or I can play all kind of games. There isn't a law they says if your nosy, a cowan, or eavesdropper then your requests for knowledge must be meet. One who is tried must always know how to handle himself. I suspect the same would apply to Masonry.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Osirisrisen

This is left for each individual Mason to answer.


Not in regard to telling the truth. As mentioned, if a Mason vows before God and his Brethren to obey the Moral Law, it's not an option to later violate his vows.

What is left to each individual Mason to answer for himself is the interpretation of Masonic symbolism, which is philosophical. But the actions of a Mason must conform to the Moral Law per his obligations, and any deviations from this is an act of unmasonic conduct.

In other words, when members are asked by non-members to divulge the secrets of Masonry, they don't show them fake secret handshakes or passwords. They either tell them point blank that they cannot betray the trust of their Brethren by revealing the secrets of Masonry unlawfully, or ignore the question altogether. This isn't being untrustworthy in the least; in fact, it's the very opposite, as the Mason is remaining true to his word when, during his initiation, he promised that he would not reveal those things to anyone except in a lawful manner. To receive the secrets of Masonry, one must prove himself worthy to possess them, and this is done the same way it's always been. A man must petition the Lodge, have his character scrutinized through investigation, and pass a unanimous ballot. After that, he must be initiated in due and ancient form, through the method bequethed to us by our Masonic forefathers. This process is what binds our members together in brotherhood, for each has experienced this process.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 11:25 AM
link   
When in Freemasonry you swear to your brothers and in front of God not to reveal their secrets, IMO Masons view this as transcending their duties to their country (IE. the Law).

And the fact that there ARE Masons in the Law, well, hmmm... I wonder what they consider their duties? One duty to uphold justice for society, and another SWORN duty to help their brethren

And now, why do people tie this into the 'ridiculous' like what is often referred 'satanism', BECAUSE there has never been ONCE reported a ritual murder, or sacrificial death REGISTERED in the United States. Not even Jon Benet Ramsey, eh?
And then there are the never-to-be-found children (not to be confused with missing children, a term designed to make it seem like the kids are still out there).

Finally, having heard about 'individually' bad Masons in the past, they are referred to as the bad apple in the bunch. Now what kind of standing up for your brothers is it to deflect people's criticism, and to admit he was the 'only bad one, really'.

Seems like a deception ploy, where it is considered necessary to de-fame the member, to keep Masonry nice and shiny. Finally, Masons, if you wish to respond, please do so only by listing details of your Great Work.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
When in Freemasonry you swear to your brothers and in front of God not to reveal their secrets, IMO Masons view this as transcending their duties to their country (IE. the Law).


You're leaving out a key point, i.e., that such secrets must be lawful. This means that if a Brother Mason comes to me in confidence about a family problem he's having, I'm obligated not to go blabbing about it all over town. The whole purpose of this clause of a Mason's obligation is to stress the importance of keeping a confidence, which is a virtue.

If, on the other hand, I discover that a Brother Mason is engaged in unmasonic conduct, it is my obligation to to file charges against him for such unmasonic conduct, that the Craft not be contaminated by an unworthy.


Finally, having heard about 'individually' bad Masons in the past, they are referred to as the bad apple in the bunch. Now what kind of standing up for your brothers is it to deflect people's criticism, and to admit he was the 'only bad one, really'.


Seeing that there have been over 40 million Masons in history, it would be both childish and foolish to assume that each one was individually a perfectly moral and virtuous man. The same is true of any organization; for example, Christianity. Christianity teaches the concepts of charity, social responsibility, and brotherly love. But there certainly are, and have been, individual Christians who have acted oppsitely the teachings of their faith.

But if Christianity teaches virtue, while an individual Christian acts immorally, you certainly can't blame Christianity for those immoral actions. And the same thing holds true for Masonry and everything else.

But, again, it is important to mention that the Masonic Fraternity has a formal method of dealing with Masons acting contrary to the Moral Law. If a Brother is in gross violation of the Moral Law, he is simply charged by his Lodge, tried, and if found guilty, expelled.

I find your comments about "individually bad Masons in history" interesting; out of the millions and millions of Masonic Lodge members throughout history, I can't even think of an entire handful who were guilty of gross immorality and were not expelled.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   

achilles wrote:
Seems like a deception ploy, where it is considered necessary to de-fame the member, to keep Masonry nice and shiny. Finally, Masons, if you wish to respond, please do so only by listing details of your Great Work.


Well now you mark us as decievers, why? because we tell the truth on any mason who does wrong, ?

If we covered this up then that would be a deception would it not. I have checked this thread and no one yet has listed any great works.

it would seem you follow the adidge

If it looks like a Mason shoot it
If it talks like a mason shhot it
If it walks like a mason shoot it
If it walks like a duck shoot it , it could be a Mason in disguise.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   
why is there a freemasonry and anything of the such?and what are they?

this is a stupid question i know but still it will answer alot of question



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I don't mean to interrupt this thread but could someone explain (either via u2u etc) what masonary is. Perhaps direct me to sections on the site or post links. In my small town this is a masonary group but I just have not yet had the chance to find out what it is about. Is it a religion? I would hope if it is a religion than brotherhood or not, I would suspect members would not support wrong doing by other members. I think that could be said of most religions. Thanks



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
The author's concept is bunk and based on poor assumptions.

No Freemason undertakes any oath to protect a brother "at all costs".

Perhaps you ought to review your concept of brotherhood entirely, to include religious orders and monasteries where that is not the case, and families where that is not the case, and the brotherhood of man where that is not the case, and Freemasonry where that is not the case. Perhaps you could redefine the word "brotherhood" to its true meaning.

I don't protect people who become corrupt or criminal, nor does anyone else have to.

What very sad logic you have applied.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by abigail
I don't mean to interrupt this thread but could someone explain (either via u2u etc) what masonary is. Perhaps direct me to sections on the site or post links. In my small town this is a masonary group but I just have not yet had the chance to find out what it is about. Is it a religion? I would hope if it is a religion than brotherhood or not, I would suspect members would not support wrong doing by other members. I think that could be said of most religions. Thanks


Freemasonry is the world's oldest and largest fraternity. All modern fraternities and sororities, including even college ones, were influenced by Masonry.

The fraternity began in the middle ages as a guild for stonemasons. Over time, the guilds became outdated, but men still joined Masonic Lodges for fellowship. In the 17th and early 18th century, Masonry became popular by teaching the new sciences and philosophies that emerged during the Age of Enlightenment, and this was the birth of modern Freemasonry.

It is a non-profit, charitable, and educational fraternal organization. At present, there are about 6 million members worldwide, with about 4 million being in the USA.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 01:10 AM
link   
I wonder if Insider Trading is too illegal for Masons,
.

I mean, I doubt they would give business contracts to, or hire fellow Brother FreeMasons. Oh wait, because they consider fellow Brothers of oh so exceptional quality (every single last one, they past ye olde rituals!) they would HAVE to hire the best candidate.

If Freemasons always mention how much money is raised on behalf of charity, lets hear it. Where does the money go, and how can Freemasonry claim other groups can do more with the money considering Masonry's extraordinary resources? Seems like a tax write-off, that garners a generous and benevolent public image, while possibly giving the money right back to fellow Masons running the corporations receiving donations.

Let me guess, this is my paranoid delusion of a criminal syndicate, nothing resembling Freemasonry?
(and Masons, take a look at the post number, 1122330...)

[edit on 27-1-2005 by akilles]



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 02:56 AM
link   


could someone explain (either via u2u etc) what masonary is.

masonary is usually considered work with rock,brick,and/or concrete.


Masonry/Freemasonry: see MLs post above.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
I mean, I doubt they would give business contracts to, or hire fellow Brother FreeMasons.


Only if they werre the best suited, ie had the right qualifications and the most experience.


Oh wait, because they consider fellow Brothers of oh so exceptional quality (every single last one, they past ye olde rituals!) they would HAVE to hire the best candidate.


The qualities of a mason are some of those you would look for in a candidate for a job, the others being able to do the job, being the best suited for the job, as for all mason's, you have already had a mason agree that some mason's go bad, you don't need to keep repeating, we can all read previous posts.


If Freemasons always mention how much money is raised on behalf of charity, lets hear it. Where does the money go, and how can Freemasonry claim other groups can do more with the money considering Masonry's extraordinary resources?


Freemasonry has no interest in Kudos, that donate in the name of Freemasonry to masonic charities and you can find the figures and where the money has gone by contacting the Grand Lodge for the area, they have to keep books like anyone else. They donate to non-masonic charities anonymously, for the most part. They donate for the cause not to say look what we did.


Seems like a tax write-off, that garners a generous and benevolent public image, while possibly giving the money right back to fellow Masons running the corporations receiving donations.


For a start you only pay tax on profit, therefore as a non-profit organisation the tax write off isn't really feesable. If you class hospitals, schools, orphanages, air ambulance, life boats and similar as corporations then i suppose you could have an argument, but not many of them are run by Masons.


Let me guess, this is my paranoid delusion of a criminal syndicate, nothing resembling Freemasonry?


Wouldn't say paranoid, more ill informed. If you read up you will find all you want to know, that's what I did.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
As the accusation is that masons look after themselves?

Parhaps you would like to view the monies given to non Masonic Charities by just one of the major Charotable groups organised under The United Grand Lodge of England, the list goes back to 1981.

www.grandcharity.co.uk...



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by billmcelligott
As the accusation is that masons look after themselves?


On top of the the Chief Executive of the Grand Charity is a women, example of masons not giving other masons the top positions over better equipped candidates.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
I wonder if Insider Trading is too illegal for Masons


Insider trading is in violation of federal law imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. It is therefore a punishable offense in Masonry, and any Mason convicted of it in the profane courts stand automatically expelled in Masonry.

But I don't recall ever hearing of a single Mason ever accused or convicted of insider trading.


I mean, I doubt they would give business contracts to, or hire fellow Brother FreeMasons. Oh wait, because they consider fellow Brothers of oh so exceptional quality (every single last one, they past ye olde rituals!) they would HAVE to hire the best candidate.


With all things being equal, I would prefer the Mason. But "all things being equal" means that I don't know either candidate, and both have equal qualifications. In this case, I know that the Mason is, at least, under formal obligation to deal truthfully, while the other is not.

If the profane candidate is better qualified, however, he would get the job. The same is true in politics; if two candidates were equal in qualification, one a Mason and the other not, I would vote for the Mason. If the profane was better qualified, I'd vote for him. An example of this was in the 1996 presidential election when I voted for a non-Mason (Clinton) over a Mason (Dole).


If Freemasons always mention how much money is raised on behalf of charity, lets hear it. Where does the money go, and how can Freemasonry claim other groups can do more with the money considering Masonry's extraordinary resources? Seems like a tax write-off, that garners a generous and benevolent public image, while possibly giving the money right back to fellow Masons running the corporations receiving donations.


There has never been a single instance of this occuring ever, and the only corporations that receive Masonic money are non-profit (i.e., Shriners Childrens Hospitals, Scottish Rite Childhood Speech Disorder Foundation, Knight Templar Eye Foundation, etc.). Furthermore, Freemasonry doesn't need tax write-offs because it is a non-profit fraternal and charitable organization. Although this has been explained here a zillion times before, each Grand Lodge is required to have its books audited yearly by an independent auditor, just like every other organization, and its financial statements are in the public domain. Money for Masonic charities are derived from a portion of members' dues, donations from members, donations from non-members, and fundraisers.

[edit on 27-1-2005 by Masonic Light]



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Sounds like a bunch of childish crap. Those that belong to something like the Masons or other like organizations are weak. I am not saying abandon all clubs and Religions, but life is wating to be experienced and I don't need a bunch of guys telling me so called 'truths' about life and reality: I have my own mind to determine these rather dogmatic, academic dimensions.

Moreover, the way you masons are protraying them, it sounds like the classic road down the garden path: shoved full of propaganda early on, only to know that your leaders are sick and twisted leaders of this world. What is so different about belonging to an organization, like, say, a society in a country! For example America with its moral code (constitution), public Universities, and the like. But hey, if you need that organization, then let it be your drug. I have read some stuff on the teachings and it is LOW RENT. The only interest I have is determining who is at the top and whether aliens exist on this planet. If I have to be a member of a stupid club, then let it be.

I am sure that in good Universities all over the world young people have more intellectually stimulating conversations than most of the ones going on in the lodges.



posted on Jan, 27 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   


I am sure that in good Universities all over the world young people have more intellectually stimulating conversations than most of the ones going on in the lodges.


Then the answer is simple Sir , go to university. You, as an individual govern your own experiences. There is no one forcing you to attend Church or a Masonic Lodge or any other group.

You go your way and let others go theirs.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join