Originally posted by Masonic Light







You know as well as I do that when he said that, he wasn't talking about the same thing that conspiracy theorists are talking about. The first President Bush's "new world order" was nothing more than an ideal of economic cooperation between the nations in the modern technological age.

I suggest you search Dr. Dennis Laurence Cuddy. He is one of the best scholars who define the NWO. Your "nothing more than an ideal of economic cooperation between the nations in the modern technological age" is a total understatement. I will not talk about this in the SS section. It is a NWO debate. Thanks.

Out of a Masonic mouth: We do not require you to worship! Only believe.

And so, how's your non-Worshipful Grand Master doing? Why don't you ask him?

Worshipful means worthy of worship, and by calling someone that, you ARE worshipping them. Unless you don't mean what you say, which seems to be all the rage in Freemasonry.

Originally posted by akilles
Out of a Masonic mouth: We do not require you to worship! Only believe.

And so, how's your non-Worshipful Grand Master doing? Why don't you ask him?

Worshipful means worthy of worship, and by calling someone that, you ARE worshipping them. Unless you don't mean what you say, which seems to be all the rage in Freemasonry.

Talking of fingers in ears, I have lost count how many times I have posted this.

A) Definition
worshipful [Show phonetics]
adjective
1 MAINLY UK FORMAL Worshipful used in the title of societies of skilled workers or some important officials:
the Worshipful Company of Silversmiths

2 FORMAL giving someone or something great respect or admiration

B) Definition
master (SKILLED PERSON) [Show phonetics]
noun [C]
1 a person who is very skilled in a particular job or activity:
He was a master of disguise.

2 a famous and very skilled painter:
This painting is clearly the work of a master.

master [Show phonetics]
adjective [before noun]
extremely skilled:
a master craftsman
a master chef

Cambridge Advanced learners Dictionary
Cambridge University Press 2004.

It is a clear definition of someone who is a leader or teacher of a set or guild of skilled workers. I do appreciate it does nothing for the , Christian activist who says it means an alternative to Christ or the concpiracy theorist who speaks as you do my friend. But the facts do get in the way sometimes.

[edit on 12-2-2005 by billmcelligott]

Originally posted by akilles
Out of a Masonic mouth: We do not require you to worship! Only believe.

I have a feeling I'm about to bang my head against a wall. But here it goes..

Masonry is not (for the gazillionth time) a religion. The only thing that is required is the belief in a Supreme Being. We don't care who, how (within leagal limits of course), where, when or even if you worship ..it's none of our business that's between you and your Supreme Being. Again, just that you believe in a Supreme Being.

So because Masonry doesn't interfere with a person's religion, that makes it a bad thing?

And so, how's your non-Worshipful Grand Master doing? Why don't you ask him?

Worshipful means worthy of worship, and by calling someone that, you ARE worshipping them. Unless you don't mean what you say, which seems to be all the rage in Freemasonry.

Hrmm so let's see a Catholic calls the Priest "Father" but the Bible says "Our Father who art in Heaven" which means that "Father" is God....so by default are we calling priests God?

Oh wait let me guess...."Father" is a term of respect and affection. Am I right?!? Could it be...yes even possible the same could be said for Worshipful Master?!? What a novel concept......


I have a question tho...some have professed that Christianity (of which I'm a believer in) is based on fact...If that being the case...then facts must answer this....If God created "everything", where did God come from?!?

"Worshipful" is a middle English term that means "honorable" (for example, in the Wycliffe translation of the Bible, we read 'Thou shalt worchyp thy fodir an thy modir' as one of the Ten Commandments). Furthermore, the term is still used in this manner in England, for example, in the title of the Right Worshipful Lord Mayor of London.

Masonry, of course, originated in medieval England, and today continues to use much of the original terminology of the Craft.

It is absolutely amazing that "akilles" is not able to understand something as simple as a single word.



[edit on 12-2-2005 by Masonic Light]

Originally posted by Masonic Light
It is absolutely amazing that "akilles" is not able to understand something as simple as a single word.

Not really that amazing. I don't think akilles is capable of understanding ANYTHING but what his narrow mind has already formulated. What's amazing is that guys like some of us on ATS keep wasting key-strokes refuting the garbage he's spewing. Maybe if we're really, really quiet, he'll go troll some other forum.

"it doesn't matter wear we all come from as long as we are all the same religion." - Peter Griffin, Family Guy episode To Live and Die in Dixie

I am curious as to the Templar/Freemason commonalities. The information I have read makes a strong case for the origins of the Scottish Masons being a continuation of the Knights Templar Order. The many shared symbols, ie: the Jolly Roger, DeMolay, the Tyler, etc. are worth noting. In 1307, Phillip the fair of France did not manage to seize the Templar fleet, and there are many reasons to conclude that they fled to safe haven in Scotland. The tactics used to route the English at Bannockburn very likely arrived with the Crusader Knights, and were a total shock to Edwards army. Though outmanned 4 to 1, the Scots under Robert Bruce trounced the invaders soundly.
What is your opinion on this theory about the Masons origins?

Don't bother asking them for thought on the subject. They have made up THEIR minds, and call others close-minded.

Then, before you know it, they are attacking your intellect and calling you 'kid', and 'an'. Which is followed by saying you started it, of course.

No word has only one meaning, so praytell, why haven't they changed it to an English word that DOESN'T have Religious connotations? You do know that right, ML, that words have ATLEAST a connotative and denotative meaning?

And I like how Master also ties into how 'skilled' you are, yet not actually superior to those people who have to call you that.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
"Worshipful" is a middle English term that means "honorable" (for example, in the Wycliffe translation of the Bible, we read 'Thou shalt worchyp thy fodir an thy modir' as one of the Ten Commandments). Furthermore, the term is still used in this manner in England, for example, in the title of the Right Worshipful Lord Mayor of London.

Masonry, of course, originated in medieval England, and today continues to use much of the original terminology of the Craft.

It is absolutely amazing that "akilles" is not able to understand something as simple as a single word.



[edit on 12-2-2005 by Masonic Light]

Axeman, I used your link as a reference.

Worshipful (adj.)
1. Given to or expressive of worship; reverent or adoring.
2. Chiefly British. Used as a respectful form of address.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.



Worshipful (adj.)
1: showing adoration [syn: adoring]
2: showing great reverence for god; "a godly man"; "leading a godly life" [syn: godly, reverent]

WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University




If by definetion you are referencing #2 of the american heritage here when using the word worshipful, then these "worshipful masters" can be called Mr., Sir, his hieness, cause these are respectful forms of address too. If you cannot, there is a problem.
I think the generally accepted defeniton is # 2 in the wordnet reference. Christians use the word worshipful by that same definiton.
The (NAB) version in Ex 20:12, commands us to "honor your father and mother", not worship. Also see Mat 15:4, Mk 7:10.

Originally posted by notmindcontrolled
If by definetion you are referencing #2 of the american heritage here when using the word worshipful, then these "worshipful masters" can be called Mr., Sir, his hieness, cause these are respectful forms of address too. If you cannot, there is a problem.
I think the generally accepted defeniton is # 2 in the wordnet reference. Christians use the word worshipful by that same definiton.
The (NAB) version in Ex 20:12, commands us to "honor your father and mother", not worship. Also see Mat 15:4, Mk 7:10.

OK but why should it be changed? It's a matter of tradition, man, don't you get it? I'm sure the Worshipful Master of the lodge is not referred to as "Master" or "Worshipful Master" all the time. It's a title. I'm sure that sir, Joe, Bob, Fred, whatever is used quite frequently. I can't see a Mason saying "Hey, Worshipful Master, you want a pint or what?" Do people go around calling the president of their company "President"? Of course not. My question to you folks is what makes you so arrogant that you think the Freemasons should change their time-honored traditions just because you don't like their terminology for their presiding officer? Give me a break dude, just who do you think you are anyway?

[edit on 2/13/05 by The Axeman]

Originally posted by The Axeman


OK but why should it be changed? It's a matter of tradition, man, don't you get it? I'm sure the Worshipful Master of the lodge is not referred to as "Master" or "Worshipful Master" all the time. It's a title. I'm sure that sir, Joe, Bob, Fred, whatever is used quite frequently. I can't see a Mason saying "Hey, Worshipful Master, you want a pint or what?" Do people go around calling the president of their company "President"? Of course not. My question to you folks is what makes you so arrogant that you think the Freemasons should change their time-honored traditions just because you don't like their terminology for their presiding officer? Give me a break dude, just who do you think you are anyway?

[edit on 2/13/05 by The Axeman]

Yes, I get it. It is a matter of semantics. Using the term "worshipful" is degrading to the generaly accepted definiton of worshiping. You can't go calling yourself worshipful, while millions of people hold that term exclusive to represent what they feel for god. Your god is worshipful, your leader, master etc.. isn't. I think that is were masons get theirselves in trouble. And, like I said, it is why I feel and alot feel that freemasonry is a religion. Do christian masons feel that their "worshipful" master is the same as "worshipful" Jesus Christ? I think their answer will be "no". So why call them "worshipful"? Why not hold that term exclusivly for Jesus Christ? Why not go against tradition and recognize that it is the wrong title to give your fratenal leader?

Originally posted by notmindcontrolled
Yes, I get it. It is a matter of semantics. Using the term "worshipful" is degrading to the generaly accepted definiton of worshiping. You can't go calling yourself worshipful, while millions of people hold that term exclusive to represent what they feel for god. Your god is worshipful, your leader, master etc.. isn't. I think that is were masons get theirselves in trouble. And, like I said, it is why I feel and alot feel that freemasonry is a religion. Do christian masons feel that their "worshipful" master is the same as "worshipful" Jesus Christ? I think their answer will be "no". So why call them "worshipful"? Why not hold that term exclusivly for Jesus Christ? Why not go against tradition and recognize that it is the wrong title to give your fratenal leader?

When has anyone ever used that term for Jesus Christ? Show me one reference to a religious text or catechism that refers to Jesus as "Worshipful Jesus Christ".

And at the risk of being repetitive...

My question to you folks is what makes you so arrogant that you think the Freemasons should change their time-honored traditions just because you don't like their terminology for their presiding officer? Give me a break dude, just who do you think you are anyway?

Besides all that, not all Masons consider Jesus Christ to be their Lord and Savior, so what about that?

[edit on 2/13/05 by The Axeman]

Calling me arrogant, while someone else asks you to call them Master.

Hmm....

Saying what nerve we have, yet are we asking anyone to refer to us as Worshipful or Grand?

Saying what nerve we have, yet are we asking anyone to refer to us as Worshipful or Grand?

and a right worthy good thing it is to.





Trolls: not just under bridges anymore/

Originally posted by akilles
Calling me arrogant, while someone else asks you to call them Master.

Since you have to ask and join Freemasonry of your own accord, I think this argument, like all your others, is bunk.

Saying what nerve we have, yet are we asking anyone to refer to us as Worshipful or Grand?

Actually the question was directed at notmindcontrolled. You, on the other hand, have got alot of something, but i don't think I would call it nerve.

Whatta a pisser, a 6 part smack o rama on the BOYZ, fully typed out and wouldnt you know......as I went to preview......it was lost. Hee hee, I love this place already. Lots and lots of work to be done here.

Originally posted by notmindcontrolled
Yes, I get it. It is a matter of semantics. Using the term "worshipful" is degrading to the generaly accepted definiton of worshiping. You can't go calling yourself worshipful, while millions of people hold that term exclusive to represent what they feel for god. Your god is worshipful, your leader, master etc.. isn't. I think that is were masons get theirselves in trouble. And, like I said, it is why I feel and alot feel that freemasonry is a religion. Do christian masons feel that their "worshipful" master is the same as "worshipful" Jesus Christ? I think their answer will be "no". So why call them "worshipful"? Why not hold that term exclusivly for Jesus Christ? Why not go against tradition and recognize that it is the wrong title to give your fratenal leader?

Millions of people hold the term "Wroshipful" exclusive to their god because, like you, they lack instruction on the proper meaning of the word. Their vocabulary, is so limited that they don't, for one second, stop to think that maybe in older days it did not mean what they think it means now. Most of the language of Freemasonry is very old and there is no reason for Freemasonry to change that just because people don't know any better.


[edit on 13-2-2005 by sebatwerk]