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.

 

Concerning Lucifer in Freemasonry

page: 8
5
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777

[18] Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


Heheh. Just caught this...

AS ABOVE, SO BELOW?


Hmmmmmmmmm...




posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by gps777


The examples i gave you on why i can not as a Christian trust Freemasonry to be biblicly based when it looks into someones past,regardless of who the person maybe at the time,does`nt sound anything like my God would accept as His own principles.He forgets when repented on purpose.

If Christianity only allowed the clean,Christianity would`nt exist accept for Christ.Freemasonry only cares about its image and you defend it?.


Firstly, Freemasonry does not claim to be biblically based. It is a secular, non-sectarian fraternal organization. Freemasonry utilizes rituals which are based in part on biblical history, but this is a historical allusion rather than a theological one.

Secondly, we are well aware that men who sin can reform, and that God forgives offenses. Nevertheless, we're a fraternity, not a church, and are exclusive in the sense that require our members to maintain a high level of moral conduct. Our method of investigating potential candidates, however, is no different than the background checks ran by the military or law enforcement, should a man wish to join those agencies. Also, certain employers require background checks. To accuse Freemasonry of being anti-Christian because it requires potential members to be men of good character seems to me to be completely absurd.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God




Looks to me they never had the light (God) in the first place, blatantly ignoring scripture in excange for their own 'rule of law'.


As mentioned, it was the scriptures that were used to condemn Galileo. No less than Martin Luther called Copernicus a "fool", saying that the latter had placed his own authority above that of the Holy Spirit by theorizing that the earth revolved around the sun. Galileo proved this mathematically, pointing out its eliptical orbit in detail. The Bible is quite clear in stating that the earth doesn't move, and this contradiction with the scriptures landed Mr. Galilei in hot water.


Originally posted by Masonic Light
Were the Christians who told Magellan that the earth was flat in need of more light?



Any educated person knew full well the earth was round by Magellan's time. What source is this coming from?


This is actually a very famous quote, and was used by Mark Twain. Nevertheless, you can find it in many places online, including here:

quotes.prolix.nu...



It's obvious to me that wordly knowledge is being hailed as "the light" which Biblically is supposed to be God.


Ah, now we're getting somewhere. If God is Light, and if Knowledge is Light, then God is obviously the giver of all Knowledge. It must come from Him.

So, the question here is: who gave us better knowledge of the empirical world's relation to the solar system....was it the Bible (through David's claim that the earth sits still), or was it Science (through Galileo, who said the earth revolves around the sun in an elliptical orbit)?



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman
Oh, come on, man! You know good and well that's not what he meant... or perhaps you didn't read the rest of the sentance?


Gotcha. It's a hard read and think that sentence can be taken either way without your highlights. My apologizes to Nygdan if you had meant it the way Axeman said it.



Originally posted by The Axeman
Only because you seem not to be paying attention... or you just made an honest mistake, one of the two.



Thank you for the benefit of the doubt. If anything, I was paying "too much" attention and picked up on some meaning in the middle of it all. I am not a Master Mason, so I'd be quite a fool if I could do anything more than ask questions and assess the answers.

[edit on 23-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:26 PM
link   

As mentioned, it was the scriptures that were used to condemn Galileo.


Masonic Light, because individuals misinterpreted the scriptures, does that make the source false? If you read a book and get a different message than the author was trying to convey, and you communicate the incorrect message, does that make the author's original message incorrect?



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AngelWitch
I know in my community, the local Baptist church is a primary sponsor of the local BSA Cub Scout pack
but going by Saint4Gods statements, wouldn't this be "being yoked with unbelievers"?


The Boy Scouts did not claim to help anyone on their spiritual jouney, to take an oath to each other, be "the light", etc. I'm not justifying the Boy Scouts because personally I think there are more beneficial organizations to join.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
As mentioned, it was the scriptures that were used to condemn Galileo. No less than Martin Luther called Copernicus a "fool", saying that the latter had placed his own authority above that of the Holy Spirit by theorizing that the earth revolved around the sun.


Martin Luther had quite a lot to say. Just because he we right to question some things about the current church leadership does not mean he was right to condemn Copernicus nor from what I understand, the Jews of the day as well. It's a good thing our example is Christ and not Luther. Furthermore "call no-one good - except the Father in heaven". That includes all of us.


Originally posted by Masonic Light
Galileo proved this mathematically, pointing out its eliptical orbit in detail. The Bible is quite clear in stating that the earth doesn't move, and this contradiction with the scriptures landed Mr. Galilei in hot water.


Other than an aforementioned Psalm (which is a song by the way) by David, where is this at? Also, when you talk about relativity, it is possible to map the earth as stationary, it's just a whole lot harder!



Originally posted by Masonic Light
Were the Christians who told Magellan that the earth was flat in need of more light?


Any educated person knew full well the earth was round by Magellan's time. What source is this coming from?


This is actually a very famous quote, and was used by Mark Twain. Nevertheless, you can find it in many places online, including here:

quotes.prolix.nu...


Thank you for the source. As I've said though, I have no doubt Magellan was defiant to many authorities, that's easy to establish. This doesn't make him a hero in my book any more than Martin Luther being a hero in yours.


Originally posted by Masonic Light
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. If God is Light, and if Knowledge is Light, then God is obviously the giver of all Knowledge. It must come from Him.


Isn't that what got us into all this mess in the first place? Seeking knowledge instead of seeking God? (Genesis 3). Seeking the creation instead of (and without) God gets us into trouble. That's what the whole Old Testament is all about.


Originally posted by Masonic Light
So, the question here is: who gave us better knowledge of the empirical world's relation to the solar system....was it the Bible (through David's claim that the earth sits still), or was it Science (through Galileo, who said the earth revolves around the sun in an elliptical orbit)?


Hm, so this is about tossing out the Bible then, is it? Clearly if the Bible is "wrong" about geocentricity, then it must be wrong in more places. Then surely it has no evidence of being right in anything does it?

Well, I'll answer your question directly in all fairness: The Bible is the Word of God, Science is not.

I appreciate your patience and re-positioning Masonic Light. We are indeed getting somewhere. I am learning, though to some I'm sure it may not look like it.


[edit on 23-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Erm...In which Psalm does David say that? I'm having trouble finding it by keyword (tried fixed, immovable, and earth), and all I've found in this thread are comments like, "David, in his Psalm" with no reference to the specific Psalm. Can I get a number?



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by The Axeman
Oh, come on, man! You know good and well that's not what he meant... or perhaps you didn't read the rest of the sentance?


Gotcha. It's a hard read and think that sentence can be taken either way without your highlights. My apologizes to Nygdan if you had meant it the way Axeman said it.


I didn't say it any differently, I merely pointed out your oversight regarding what he said.



Thank you for the benefit of the doubt. If anything, I was paying "too much" attention and picked up on some meaning in the middle of it all.


Of course. I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt; unless, of course, they are an obvious troll, which you are not.



I am not a Master Mason, so I'd be quite a fool if I [thought I] could do anything more than ask questions and assess the answers.


I'm going to assume you meant to add the words in brackets; if so, what does that make me?! Am I a fool for being of the opinion that I understand the concepts and principles of Freemasonry? I'm not a Master Mason... indeed, I have yet to even be initiated. I've simply done my homework and applied some critical thinking.

If that's not what you meant, please explain.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman
I didn't say it any differently, I merely pointed out your oversight regarding what he said.


Fair enough. The use of 'thus' is what had me tripped up. I though he was using in the context of "therefore the superstition..." etc. like in definition # 3 of www.m-w.com... instead of definition 1 or 4 in connection with the i.e. examples he was given. I'm no linguist and see what you're saying and will admit that I'm wrong, now being told I didn't understand what was meant. I agree that meaning is more important than wording, but also please realize have no experiences in which to discern Masonic beliefs other than the words that are being set before be. Aka, it's why I argue a lot, but it's not agruing to argue nor meant to be non-progressive.


Originally posted by The Axeman
Of course. I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt; unless, of course, they are an obvious troll, which you are not.


Thank you. There are days where I wonder if I am by reading some responses. I have no intent to harm.


Originally posted by The Axeman
I'm going to assume you meant to add the words in brackets; if so, what does that make me?! Am I a fool for being of the opinion that I understand the concepts and principles of Freemasonry? I'm not a Master Mason... indeed, I have yet to even be initiated. I've simply done my homework and applied some critical thinking.


Not at all. I'm saying I'd be a fool for saying I know all about Masonry. I don't. Your bracketed version is better than mine, thanks for the edit and clarification. I've done no research other than what Masonic Light (and a few others) has pointed out to me.


Originally posted by The Axeman
If that's not what you meant, please explain.


I'm glad you did the background work. You have one up on me. For me, I value testimony though over published works when living people say they represent the principles of an organization. This IS my research, in other words. For example, I did not believe in God because I read the Bible. I came to God, whom directed me to the Bible. Not saying that one cannot come to God from the Bible, in fact, I think that's probably the majority, but I'm bass-ackwards as they like to say, on my approaches. Yes, this approach has gotten me into trouble sometimes, but it has also given me some very interesting para-dig'ems.


[edit on 23-9-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
Isn't that what got us into all this mess in the first place? Seeking knowledge instead of seeking God? (Genesis 3). Seeking the creation instead of (and without) God gets us into trouble. That's what the whole Old Testament is all about.


Disclaimer: I do not necessarily agree with this; just pointing it out:

*Blasphemy alert*
(sorry I couldn’t help it.
)

There are those who would argue that the God of the Old Testament is not the Father, the God who sent Jesus to save us; rather that The Father sent Jesus to save us from the God of the Old Testament.


from: en.wikipedia.org...

Gnosticism also presents a distinction between the highest, unknowable "alien God" and the "creator" of the material - the Demiurge. However, in contrast to Plato, many systems of Gnostic thought present the Demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Creator: this sort of Demiurge focusses solely on material reality and on the "sensuous soul". In this system, the Demiurge acts as a solution to the problem of evil. In the Apocryphon of John (in the Nag Hammadi library), the Demiurge has the name "Yaltabaoth", and proclaims himself as God:

"Now the archon who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas, and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, 'I am God and there is no other God beside me,' for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."

Yaldabaoth literally means "Child, come hither" in a certain Semitic language. Gnostic myth recounts that Sophia (literally 'wisdom', the Demiurge's mother and aspect of the Father) desired to create something apart from the Father to which he did not consent. In this act of separation, she gave birth to the Demiurge and being ashamed of her deed, she wrapped him in a cloud and created a throne for him within it. The Demiurge did not see her, nor anyone else, and thus concluded that only he himself existed, he did not know the source of his power and did not know that there was someone above him. The myth is full of intricate nuances portraying the first separation which later turned into the entrapment of the divine spark, Sophia, within the human form. This spark is latent until awakened by a call and the knowledge of one as this divine spark is the beginning of restoration of Sophia as well as gnosis.



from: en.wikipedia.org...

Gnosticism generally taught that the Earth was ruled over by a lesser "god" called Yaldabaoth, also known as the Demiurge, after Plato (Gr. demiurgos - "one who shapes"). The Demiurge was the head of the Archons, "petty rulers" and craftsmen of the physical world. But human bodies, although their matter is "fallen", contained within them a divine spark or pneuma that fell from the Source, or Nothingness from which all things came. Knowledge (gnosis) enables the divine spark to return to the Source whence it came.

It is improper to declare that all Gnostics felt matter to be completely negative. In many instances, matter is merely described as "evil", as in Plotinian philosophy, as a method of depicting its extreme separation from the primary source of being. Many Gnostics also made use of ritual; ritual being the manipulation of material objects in imitation of divine events or occurences, this presupposes at least the ability of matter to be used for positive effect. Valentinus himself, often referred to as the Gnostic teacher par excellence, only referred to matter as an obscuration of the truth, and its creator only as ignorant of higher powers, not as evil.

In another similarity to Plotinus, many Gnostics (especially the followers of the aforementioned Valentinius) taught that there was the One, the original, unknowable God (sometimes named Bythos, the Monad as it is called by Monoimus, or the first Aeon); and then from the One emanated other Aeons, pairs of lesser beings in sequence. (Valentinius listed 30 such pairs.) The Aeons together made up the Pleroma, or fullness, of God. The lowest of these pairs were Sophia ("Wisdom" in Greek) and Christ.

In the Valentinian Gnostic creation myth, Sophia sought the unknowable One. In one account, she saw a distant light which was in fact a mirror image, and thus drifted even farther away from the pleroma.
Sophia's fear and anguish of losing her life, just as she lost the light of the One, caused confusion and longing to return to it. Because of these longings the matter (Greek: hyle) and the soul (Greek: psyche) accidentally came into existence through the four classical elements fire, water, earth, and air. The creation of the lion-faced Demiurge is also a mistake during this exile, according to some Gnostic sources, as a result of Sophia trying to emanate on her own, without her male counterpart. The Demiurge proceeds to create the physical world in which we live, ignorant of Sophia, who nevertheless manages to infuse some spiritual spark into the creation of the Demiurge. This spark is the pneuma.

After this the savior (Christos) returns and lets her see the light again, bringing her knowledge of the spirit (Greek: pneuma). Christ was then sent to earth in the form of the man Jesus to give men the gnosis needed to rescue themselves from the physical world and return to spiritual world.


Now, what might be blasphemy to you could be gospel Truth to another; and I must say that, while I am not Gnostic, their theology is indeed very interesting. It leaves altogether fewer inconsistencies and things that make you go “Hmmmmm...” than trying to reconcile the Old and New Testaments’ many contradictions.

To me, it’s a matter of personal faith; but still, to be able to explain some of those contradictions would be nice.



[edit on 9/23/05 by The Axeman]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God


Thank you for the source. As I've said though, I have no doubt Magellan was defiant to many authorities, that's easy to establish. This doesn't make him a hero in my book any more than Martin Luther being a hero in yours.


Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for Luther. As mentioned, the Reformation was the first shot fired in the Enlightenment.




Isn't that what got us into all this mess in the first place? Seeking knowledge instead of seeking God? (Genesis 3). Seeking the creation instead of (and without) God gets us into trouble. That's what the whole Old Testament is all about.


I thought the Old Testament was all about the ancient Jewish deity smiting folks with floods, fire and brimstone, demanding blood sacrifices, ordering barbaric soldiers to massacre innocent civilians, and making bears maul little kids to death because they made of fun of his buddies.

You see...I can play at this game too.


As for our earlier conversation concerning biblical accuracy, the fact is that the Bible is just plain wrong about some things. You appear to be offended by this statement, which perplexes me. After all, the Rig Veda and Qu'ran are wrong in parts too.

I realize that you say the Bible is the "word of God", and that may very well be so in dealing with its spiritual teachings, especially those through Christ. But I seriously doubt that God would claim that camels don't have divided hooves, when in fact they do. Nor do I think that God would claim that hares "chew the cud" or that bats are birds.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Whew, that was a pain in the patookus, but I think I found the Psalm ML was talking about. It's Psalm 104:5 (NASB):


5He established the earth upon its foundations,
So that it will not totter[or move out of place] forever and ever.


It's an interesting premise if one ignores the other references to it.

First off, Scripture is infallable, and the Psalms are scripture. Granted, they are songs, but they're songs written by the Holy Spirit and are as valid as the Gospel.

If you look at the statement, though, it is true as far as astrophysics are concerned. While the Earth is moving, it is also staying in it's place. If it didn't, it would be remarkably hotter or colder than it is, there would be some massive tectonic activity taking place, and life as we know it could not exist on the planet. It does not totter.

What's also not being recognized is the refence to two other pieces of scripture in this verse: Job 38:4 and Psalm 24:2. They add even more context to the meaning of this verse:

Job 38:4

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,


Psalm 24:2

2For He has founded it upon the seas
And established it upon the rivers.


Now if only I knew the Bible well enough to know that on my own...



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by AngelWitch
I know in my community, the local Baptist church is a primary sponsor of the local BSA Cub Scout pack
but going by Saint4Gods statements, wouldn't this be "being yoked with unbelievers"?


The Boy Scouts did not claim to help anyone on their spiritual jouney, to take an oath to each other, be "the light", etc. I'm not justifying the Boy Scouts because personally I think there are more beneficial organizations to join.

Please do find the time to review the thread on masonic obligations I suggested earlier. Hopefully it will help you understand that freemasons do NOT take an oath to each other. If there is still any doubt in your mind about this I will happily tackle any lingering uncertainty.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Trinityman
If there is still any doubt in your mind about this I will happily tackle any lingering uncertainty.






Trinityman, Forum Linebacker... ROFL

Sorry, I know it's off topic but I had to... too funny...

[edit on 9/23/05 by The Axeman]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   
I think I got the information I needed. Since there are no further questions for me I'll be on my way.

Pray, train, study,
God bless.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   

First off, Scripture is infallable...


So... I'm curious... Do you sacrifice animals?


Exodus 29:38 "This is what you are to offer on the altar regularly each day: two lambs a year old. 39 Offer one in the morning and the other at twilight. 40 With the first lamb offer a tenth of an ephah [c] of fine flour mixed with a quarter of a hin [d] of oil from pressed olives, and a quarter of a hin of wine as a drink offering. 41 Sacrifice the other lamb at twilight with the same grain offering and its drink offering as in the morning—a pleasing aroma, an offering made to the LORD by fire.

42 "For the generations to come this burnt offering is to be made regularly at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting before the LORD. There I will meet you and speak to you; 43 there also I will meet with the Israelites, and the place will be consecrated by my glory.


...because God says you should every day... "for the generations to come this burnt offering is to be made regularly..."

[edit on 9/23/05 by The Axeman]



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
I think I got the information I needed. Since there are no further questions for me I'll be on my way.


Do you have no response to my post?

I'm curious as to your opinion on what I posted concerning the Old Testament.

Also my previous post about sacrifices... I'm not trying to argue with you, I just want to know what you think, and why. I'm always interested to find out why people who are so steadfast in their beliefs as to be intolerant are so adamant about it.

So there are questions for you after all!



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman
Do you have no response to my post?

I'm curious as to your opinion on what I posted concerning the Old Testament.

Also my previous post about sacrifices... I'm not trying to argue with you, I just want to know what you think, and why. I'm always interested to find out why people who are so steadfast in their beliefs as to be intolerant are so adamant about it.

So there are questions for you after all!


Oh. Given the responses, it didn't look like any of my input was warranted. Since I have the information I needed, I thought it be best left to others. Okay, lemme see if I can go back.



posted on Sep, 23 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by saint4God
Isn't that what got us into all this mess in the first place? Seeking knowledge instead of seeking God?



Originally posted by junglejake
First off, Scripture is infallable...


Rom 10:2 (NIV) For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge.

Prov 19:2 (NIV) It is not good to have zeal without knowledge, nor to be hasty and miss the way.

Hos 4:6 (NIV) My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge.

Prov 1:28-33 (NIV) "They will call to me but I will not answer; they will look for me but will not find me. Since they hated knowledge and did not choose to fear the Lord, since they would not accept my advice and spurned my rebuke, they will eat of the fruit of their ways and be filled with the fruit of their schemes. For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them; but whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm."

Eph 5:17 (NIV) Therefore, do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is.

Prov 23:23 (NIV) Buy the truth and do not sell it; get wisdom, discipline, and understanding.

Prov 9:6 (NIV) Leave your simple ways and you will live; walk in the way of understanding.

Jam 1:5 (NIV) If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.

Prov 8:11 (NIV) For wisdom is more precious than rubies, and nothing you desire can compare with her.

Prov 19:8 (NIV) He who gets wisdom loves his own soul; he who cherishes understanding prospers.

Prov 13:20 (NIV) He who walks with the wise grows wise, but a companion of fools suffers harm.

Prov 24:5-6 (NIV) A wise man has great power, and a man of knowledge increases strength. For waging war you need guidance, and for victory many advisers.



[edit on 9/23/05 by The Axeman]




top topics



 
5
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join