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.

 

PR on the Payroll?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Yeah I have heard (and read) lots about the renegade masons.

Its a real pity because that is where a lot of the misinformation comes from. People start their own lodge and start doing some crazy things and Freemasons get blamed with it.

Real Shame.




posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ConspiracyNut23
But how can freemasonry be involved in charity and not take these matter into consideration? I read that (not sure if it’s true) that the Shrinners are a charity with assets of about 2 Billion US dollars. I believe that people in charge of investing (in this case divesting) assets so large would require these matters to be taken into consideration.


Actually, the assets are up over 9 billion U.S. dollars now that the market has rebounded a little.

Here is a FY 2004 analysis of the Shriner's Hospitals:

www.forbes.com...

Please note the charitable commitment/efficiency.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
Roark,

Before I answer your questions I’d like to ask you first; did you really read all of my post? If you had than you could not possibly think my post so anti-Masonic that it would prompt you to respond in this kind of fashion. Are you so sure as to have not noticed that the Administrators and Moderators of ATS had to place sticky’s regarding ATS not being a lodge? If there was not an extraordinary amount of Mason posters here, than why did the ATS Administrators and Moderators have to post sticky’s on it? Are they somehow mistaken in their views in doing so - which includes "Skull and Bones" or any harmless frats in general. Please don't forget what ATS is all about? Now, I take it that you’re one of the two types I mentioned, either unaware due to common lodge practices, or a liar. I can tell you are a fine young adult and that you’re upset, so I assume you are not very much in control enough to be much of a liar – just a little bit misguided.


So, you think it somehow inappropriate for Masons to defend against unsubstantiated attacks on the Craft?


I see, so you assume that what has been posted here is all but unsubstantiated? That’s a large cleveite to take upon your shoulders – are you aware of the size of ATS and the sheer ocean of substantiated claims? Now, I do not think it is inappropriate to respond to or defend oneself or even a lodge but it also matters in which fashion the response comes. The intent matters also. There comes a point Roark when pride takes over and then its only sarcasm, back and forth like ping-pong. Remember, I alluded before that my purpose in coming here was not to bash Freemasonry but I also did not come here to argue with people who are simply too blind to accept that conspiracies do exist within ALL groups including Masonry. Only a child or a blinded person would claim that all this information cannot be substantiated as a whole, (I am not calling you blind) but what I am referring to is the notion that one group is completely innocent – that is very silly to assume when considering the vast history and sheer size of Masonry and all of the books, and evidence! If there was nothing of substance than, by the Gods, Freemasonry (a lodge, a fraternity) would be almost as almighty as heaven herself!


I mean, let's get serious here Markus. Almost every charge levelled against Freemasonry on this site begins with "I know this Freemason who >". The vast majority of anti-Masonic opinion on this board is based on 2nd-hand information obtained from "a friend".


If all you can gather from my post is that I am a person who cannot back up claims, than maybe you would like me to prove the sun exists also? Some things are obvious, for instance YOU being the first to respond to my post. As a Christian person born into a family; both the church and of Freemasonry I think I can attest for something. Btw, you assume too much friend and not everyone who has a credit card need to post the numbers publicly to simply have it, or make it so.


Your posts, on the other hand, are full of vague references to Masonic plots and intentions that you have NEVER substantiated with comprehensive facts or history. Hell, you even tried to suggest that Hitler was working with the Freemasons at one point. In light of his persecution of the Brethren (and 80,000 dead), this is clearly ridiculous.


You repeat the same statement as above. Are you once more claiming that everything levied against Masons on ATS, cannot be substantiated. My eye is very focused on your REAL intention Roark – but not for the reason that you would like others to imagine. Since you had to bring Hitler up than I will address it one last time. Yes, Hitler was connected to Ottoman-Freemasonry and when Rudolf Stieiner exposed this publically, Hitler tried to kill him - although not the main reason - just another. But it's much deeper than that. Somehow, you claim that this is ridiculous in light of the fact that Hitler killed so many people in such evil. Well, I'm sorry you feel that way but remember that just because Hitler was a member of a certain sect of Free-Masonry, it doesn't mean that all Masons are to blame, or connected to Hitler. You also forgot to mention the zionist connection and the fact that Hitler was a member of the "White Lodge" before he fell into evil. Hitler was enlightened and we're now getting into deep waters so to keep this short - The zionists used Hitler (through Tibetean agents) to kill many innocent Jews, which thus gave a great reason for Sir Balfour and Lord Rothschild to create the nation state of Israel. These answers are sometimes more complex and not always covered in high school history textbooks, Roark.


My frustration stems from this: I am a relatively young member of Freemasonry, but I see guys like Trinityman and Masonic Light here every day - patiently dishing out reams of information about Freemasonry. Straight from the horses mouth - yet pearls before swine. Their posts are often in response to conspiracy theorists here who are - wait for it - trying to ascertain the truth. Their genuine attempt to be helpful is, more often than not, labelled as "disinformation" because people like you would rather cling to your medieval fantasy of a worldwide conspiracy instituted by my organisation, when the reality is that most Lodges are more concerned with getting their membership dues booked and the ceremonial elements of our activities nailed properly.


First, I thank you for the honesty. So you claim to be a Mason, yet even still I have no way of knowing for sure, if you’re pulling my leg. But I accept that you claim to be true and I will not call you a liar as you would call others. However, have you ever even considered that certain so-called Masons here are not Masons at all, even though they claim to be? Your frustration would be better focused on the world at large, dear friend – do not feel that those righteous Masons here are people you know for sure. Have you met them personally and do you think that Masons are suffering so grievously in the world today that you would need to shed such tears for them? So where then does your humanity lay, Roark? Do you support Masons, or do you support the concepts of brotherly love – which includes the entire world and basically a point I alluded to in my first 2 posts?


We simply don't have time for baby sacrifices or the manipulation of governments.


Your statement shows immaturity and lack of real wisdom. Who's "WE"? Are you sure that all Masons are clean as can be and do you speak fo all masons? Are you speaking for Hitler's old Thule/Vril based Ottoman-Freemasonry also? So, you want to belief that the world is a bed of roses, go right on ahead but shame on those of you who would tell this to those mothers who had their children kidnapped by the CIA agency called “The Finders”. Would you like to see it on Fox news before its real for you; to suppose it has any substance of truth? Not too considerate of those childless mothers whose life was torn apart, I think.


Freemasonry remains one of the most honourable institutions in the world. Nobody has presented ANYTHING remotely based in fact which demonstrates otherwise.


FREEMASONRY IS HONOURABLE!! Yet that is not based on charity but on its true spiritual foundation which without it has nothing/Zippo/zero to brag about and nothing to go to war over.


We try and do charitable things purely for their own sake - we are attacked by fundamentalist Christians.


I do think you’re a little younger than me and I do not think your understanding me very clearly. Charity is a cover and means little when thrown into the mouths of the masses this day and age. We must look closer at these things in order to fully understand the nature of it.


We try to mind our own business and maintain privacy - we are attacked by paranoiacs for trying to run the world.


YOU are a human being that should do that regardless and thus the nature of respecting the privacy of others. We don’t need to keep hearing it from Masons any more than from the fellow who lives next door to you.


And here you are, trying to take it one step further and suggest that defence of our activities in the face of accusations of criminal atrocities is inappropriate?!!


And here I am speaking of the church and Zionism and the Jews and Evangelistic Christian also. You must have over read that part in all your anger.


My challenge to you, or any other like-minded person here, is this:

Give the readers of ATS something... ANYTHING, based in fact, which supports the view that we do ANY of the following as an organization:

- Seek to dominate and rule the world.
- Satanic ritual abuse or Satanic worship
- Black magic
- Nepotism or illegal business dealings

You don't have to provide evidence for all of them. Just pick one! Pick one, and then present a SHRED of meaningful evidence. Facts, not musings.


Well, where to start? I think my post was addressed at the past occultist relationship of Freemasonry. This is to be taken as something of the most honorable nature – for it deserves such! So let’s make this even easier for you, did you answer my question about what is freemasonry in your own words, without getting all in a fuss and without posting links? No! You just asked me a bunch of question which in any case I can and will address but you know all too well, will take a very long time and much, much work. How about since you cannot tell me what true real-Masonry is, can you at least tell me why you believe that Albert Pike, Blavatsky, Manly Hall, Rudolf Steiner, and many other advanced people seem to associate freemasonry with the occult sciences and yet some of you seem to think that I’m just mucking around here? You’re not yet ready to get into it, when you are already buried so deep into matter that you cannot fathom the idea that some people here actually do KNOW 100% that there REALLY IS an Esoteric side to Free-Masonry - even connected to the Templar’s and going back much furher than that. Now are the Templar’s evil? No, certainly not in my own major study of it but to deny discussion into these things as mere "ghost stories" is going to get some deserved discussion, so its best we be honest and start discussing things, instead of cussing.


In fact, you can add to the list if you like! Level a charge against Freemasonry, and provide relevant supporting evidence. I'm willing to wager that it will not stand on its own.

Yes, I'm angry and frustrated. I just want to see if, once and for all, ANYONE can actually give the readers of this forum something a little more substantial than the utter pap they've been fed thus far.


Round and round we go. Roark, are you not catching this pattern as I have? If you are angry then I suggest some deep meditation and perhaps you simply need to chill out a little bit. If you’re so angry, then I suggest that you ask for guidance from God, or from your own inner voice and please do not allow yourself to fall under such influences.


Meet the challenge.

I hesitate to say this, but I honestly think that there are some very sick people here. The guy who claims to have been demonically possessed due to the work of Freemasons springs to mind...


Now Roark, there is no need to be rude and I’m not suggesting that I believe in everyhting that was claimed, either. However, I know a Christian church that was involved in Satanic ceremonies in the lower chamber and I never took any offense to the one person delivering the message. If you wish to call this other poster a sick person you best first be getting to know him a little better, or give him a chance to post more evidence.


To anyone who's still reading: Search your heart. Are you here to seek Truth, or are you merely grinding a very large axe? Is the world a duller place without cloak-and-dagger cabals by old men wearing aprons? Probably... but the truth is much more important than a blissfully exciting fantasy.


You have in the past reacted in great anger to my comments Roark. Fear begets anger and that does not look good – it appears very desperate and I have already hinted that I am not out to get Freemasonry here, so I wonder why you feel so worried about my true and honest approach as per my two first posts?




Freemasonry's track record stands on its own. The truth of your self-aggrandising tirade does not. You, who have not set foot inside a Lodge, still insist on telling us what our organization has become, like some kind of spiritual guru. Get real, mate.


You assume too much Roark. I’ll tell you that I was there and close to it before you were fully grown.




[edit on 15-3-2006 by markusjharper]


So Markus, in summary: You couldn't meet the challenge in any way, and you had to resort to ad hominem arguments and condescension to make your, uhh... rebuttal.

At least I know what I'm dealing with here.

Good luck with your thread.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Thanks for all the feedback.

Yes, I am aware that UGLE claims authority but it is not the only one with authority and not even the oldest. Early Masonry was more Templar-like and modern masonry is so decadent that it barely resmebles what it was back in Pike’s day.

Now are we to assume that the ONLY Masonic organisations that give a BAD name to UGLE accepted Masonry, are rogue? What about UGLE, are they not involved in taking any of the responsibility here and are they so special that they can claim the round table group, which consisted of Freemasons:

Cecil Rhodes, 33 degree Freemason
W. T. Stead, 33 degree Freemason
Brett (Lord Esher), 33 degree Freemason
Milner, 33 degree Freemason
Arthur (Lord) Balfour, 33 degree Freemason
(Sir) Harry Johnston, 33 degree Freemason
Lord Rothschild, 33 degree Freemason
Albert (Lord) Grey, 33 degree Freemason

Had nothing to do with real masonry and thus they must have been a special case? So let me get this straight:

Masonry seemed to be targeted for special use by Lord Rothschild himself in the 1770’s and then the Illuminati disappears forever. And then is resurrected by Freemasons and Zionists working with Cecil Rhodes while hiding an agenda from the Christians and rest of the nation. Somehow these people were also members of the UGLE accepted Freemasonry.

Gentleman, I need your help. I think Freemasonry is under attack and thus true Masonry must be separated from all these conspiracies. We need to separate these bad men from the true lodge. Can you help me prove that these men, who some of them were multibillionaires – in those days, have no affiliation to a UGLE accepted lodge?



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
Yes, I am aware that UGLE claims authority but it is not the only one with authority and not even the oldest. Early Masonry was more Templar-like and modern masonry is so decadent that it barely resmebles what it was back in Pike’s day.

Yet again Marcus you demonstrate your deep lack of understanding of all things masonic. UGLE is the oldest Grand Lodge in the world, and like all GLs only exercises authority within its own jurisdiction, which in the case of UGLE is England & Wales. Masonry before this did not have a governing structure, but was comprised of independent lodges emerging from their operative past. Pike is a US freemason and virtually unheard of in the UK. Don't mix your masonries or you may come unstuck



Now are we to assume that the ONLY Masonic organisations that give a BAD name to UGLE accepted Masonry, are rogue? What about UGLE, are they not involved in taking any of the responsibility here and are they so special that they can claim the round table group, which consisted of Freemasons:

Please explain what you are talking about. At what point has UGLE 'claimed' the round table. I think you'll find it has not.


Masonry seemed to be targeted for special use by Lord Rothschild himself in the 1770’s and then the Illuminati disappears forever. And then is resurrected by Freemasons and Zionists working with Cecil Rhodes while hiding an agenda from the Christians and rest of the nation. Somehow these people were also members of the UGLE accepted Freemasonry.

You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that freemasons do things other than freemasonry. You also like to post lists of people who were all (apparently) members of the Supreme Council of the A&A Rite, with no source. I'd quite like to know your source actually, if you wouldn't mind.


Gentleman, I need your help.

You do??? (I'll bite
)


Can you help me prove that these men, who some of them were multibillionaires – in those days, have no affiliation to a UGLE accepted lodge?

You'd like me to prove a negative?
And how exactly could I possibly do that? Do tell Markus.

And whilst you're at it why not prove that you're not a UGLE freemason - that should be quite easy to do, shouldn't it?


[edit on 17-3-2006 by Trinityman]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   
I think it wise that you don’t underestimate my intentions just yet, Trinityman. If you’re going to attempt to hijack this thread, better make sure it counts for something.


Yet again Marcus you demonstrate your deep lack of understanding. UGLE is the oldest Grand Lodge in the world. Masonry before this did not have a governing structure, but was comprised of independent lodges emerging from their operative past. Pike is a US freemason and virtually unheard of in the UK. Don't mix your masonries or you may come unstuck


Do not take me for a fool, as the GLE was older than the UGLE but it wasn’t until the Antients broke away from the moderns that it came to pass that UGLE was result of the amalgamation with the other. And Pike knew the Great Arcanum and you do not, so don’t assume that Masonry is the same today, as it was in Pike’s day. Why you bring up the UK, beats me?


Please explain what you are talking about. At what point has UGLE 'claimed' the round table. I think you'll find it has not.


The men who are the modern Illuminati were Freemasons also - UGLE accepted masons. Are you not sure the significance of these men in history, or are you simply trying to place words in my mouth and so poor natured as to think me a fool for even trying to suggest such a possibility?


You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that freemasons do things other than freemasonry. You also like to post lists of people who were all (apparently) members of the Supreme Council of the A&A Rite, with no source. I'd like to know your source actually.


My source, why are we going to go around in circles now? I already mentioned this on my other post in this same thread that one need only do a simple www.google.ca search and see that these men were freemasons, according to pro Mason websites. You see Trinityman, many people hold these men at the highest regard and they are proud to consider them Freemasons. They do not understand that in doing so, they are making a big mistake.

It's becoming abundantly obvious that you are only interested in defending your egoistic ideas, and have no interest in finding the truth of anything. An example is how you start threads like a goof and you think its’ funny that people have hearts and try and investigate matters for themselves. Not only are you making Freemasonry look bad, but also you attempt to side with every idea “mainstream” and those in the know, "know" mainstream today tends to be a big bunch of hooey! Is this a trend to be found here with many so-called Masons and how is it that very few these so-called Mason posters, rarely speak in opposition to the ideas of a NWO? I see few Masons worried and it seems to me that as long as Masonry is looking great, guys like you could care less if the entire world is going to hell in a hand basket.


You do??? (I'll bite )


I’m not perfect but if you think I won’t save the best for last, than I can assure you that your making a very big mistake. I feel it important to separate Freemasonry from a simple “lodge” idea and have it restored to the rightful spiritual foundation, to thereby deliver us into a new form of brotherhood that is conditioned correct for our modern times.


And whilst you're at it why not prove that you're not a UGLE freemason - that should be quite easy to do, shouldn't it?


I don’t have time to play any of your games. Why don’t you care about the possibility that these men may be affiliated with UGLE accepted entities? Would not any decent Christian try and do the same and make sure that it is fully stressed that the tenants of Jesus Christ are not compatible with the policies and vices of these men? Are there any such tenants in freemaosnry in a mere lodge of charity, which would compel a Mason to disassociate himself from an evil man that does charity? There is LITTLE reason to care unless spiritually grounded and perhaps that may just be my point here? One thing is for sure; Freemasonry is not perfect and is not beyond all accountability but you seem to imply that nothing is true about what has been said in the past. Either your incredibly naive, or do not deserve to be called a Mason.



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
Lord Rothschild, 33 degree Freemason


Very interesting MJ. It seems to they might have picked some of their members from Masonic organizations. Do you have a more complete list of the Round Table Group? Didn’t the CFR spring from there?

(But I would venture to guess that Rhode’s conduct in South Africa would be un-Masonic, I’m sure setting up diamond monopolies and leaving the local population in poverty doesn’t exactly follow Masonic ideals.)



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Keep digging Markus


Originally posted by markusjharper
Do not take me for a fool, as the GLE was older than the UGLE but it wasn’t until the Antients broke away from the moderns that it came to pass that UGLE was result of the amalgamation with the other.

You amply demonstrate your own foolishness without any help from me. Your knowledge of masonic history is pitiful. You are using the acronym GLE to refer to the Moderns, whereas both rival pre-1813 GLs used that title. The Antients did not 'break away' from the Moderns but formed independently from a group of (mostly Irish) freemasons who were unhappy with the the way things were being run. UGLE, being a merger of the Antients and Moderns can therefore quite legitimately call itself the oldest Grand Lodge in the World.


And Pike knew the Great Arcanum and you do not, so don’t assume that Masonry is the same today, as it was in Pike’s day.

You are assuming that I am making an assumption, which I am not. Masonry as practiced under UGLE has hardly changed at all over the period. In the US there have been more changes, but fundamentally the ritual hasn't really altered.

How freemasonry is perceived by the wider community has changed, and the people who have become freemasons have changed as they are drawn from the very same wider community.


Why you bring up the UK, beats me?


You're so funny markus. What do you think UGLE stands for?



Please explain what you are talking about. At what point has UGLE 'claimed' the round table. I think you'll find it has not.


The men who are the modern Illuminati were Freemasons also - UGLE accepted masons. Are you not sure the significance of these men in history, or are you simply trying to place words in my mouth and so poor natured as to think me a fool for even trying to suggest such a possibility?

Well I certainly think you're ignorant - you've amply demonstrated that already. You are a perfect example of the old maxim 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'. You've done a little research into freemasonry and suddenly you're an expert, telling all us freemasons about what really goes on in the organization. Get real. Oh - and answer the question.

What do you mean by UGLE-accepted? Members of UGLE or members of Grand Lodges in amity? You need to be clear as the two are very different.



You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that freemasons do things other than freemasonry. You also like to post lists of people who were all (apparently) members of the Supreme Council of the A&A Rite, with no source. I'd like to know your source actually.


snipped much foolishness and patronizing

So that's a NO then? How do you expect anyone to take you seriously if you can't back up your assertions?


I’m not perfect but if you think I won’t save the best for last, than I can assure you that your making a very big mistake.

Am I? Why... what will happen to me...?


I feel it important to separate Freemasonry from a simple “lodge” idea and have it restored to the rightful spiritual foundation, to thereby deliver us into a new form of brotherhood that is conditioned correct for our modern times.

If you want to change freemasonry then why not go off and form your own Grand Lodge? It seems to be all the rage at the moment
Your concept of its 'rightful spiritual foundation' is, I've no doubt fascinating, but you'll forgive me if I'm not overly excited about it based on your postings to date.



And whilst you're at it why not prove that you're not a UGLE freemason - that should be quite easy to do, shouldn't it?


I don’t have time to play any of your games.

Then why do you expect me to play yours? The point is clear - a negative cannot be proven and you're just miffed that you've been caught with your hand in the proverbial cookie jar, by asking questions that cannot be answered.


Why don’t you care about the possibility that these men may be affiliated with UGLE accepted entities?

Notwithstanding that I have no idea what a UGLE-accepted entity is (why don't you use the same language as everyone else rather than make this stuff up? You're an obfuscator), why should I care? Freemasonry is open to all men, of all races, creeds and backgrounds, who believe in a Supreme Being and who have a sincere desire to improve themselves. It's a free world, pal.


Would not any decent Christian try and do the same and make sure that it is fully stressed that the tenants of Jesus Christ are not compatible with the policies and vices of these men?

[groan]What now[/groan]. They might. What's that got to do with freemasonry?


Are there any such tenants in freemaosnry in a mere lodge of charity, which would compel a Mason to disassociate himself from an evil man that does charity?

Not that I know of.


There is LITTLE reason to care unless spiritually grounded and perhaps that may just be my point here?

I've read your post several times and I'm still none the wiser as to what your point actually is.


One thing is for sure; Freemasonry is not perfect ...

Don't you mean freemasons? Freemasonry is a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols. Freemasons are the membership. Freemasonry has no opinion on anything non-masonic. Freemasons have a wide variety of opinion. Again, it seems like you're getting the two mixed up.


...and is not beyond all accountability but you seem to imply that nothing is true about what has been said in the past.

You do like to talk in riddles don't you? Where did I imply that the Past is false? I've been trying to give you a masonic history lesson but you seem to know better. Your pride is getting the better of you, my friend.


Either your incredibly naive, or do not deserve to be called a Mason.

Coming from you, I think this is probably a compliment



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 05:58 AM
link   

You are using the acronym GLE to refer to the Moderns, whereas both rival pre-1813 GLs used that title. The Antients did not 'break away' from the Moderns but formed independently from a group of (mostly Irish) freemasons who were unhappy with the the way things were being run. UGLE, being a merger of the Antients and Moderns can therefore quite legitimately call itself the oldest Grand Lodge in the World.


What you seem to have failed to take notice of, is that my initial point was that, yes, I am aware that UGLE claims authority but it is not the only authority and in fact not even the oldest form of Freemasonry. That was my initial point and that is all it was. Early Masonry was more Templar-like and modern masonry is so decadent that it barely resembles what it was like back in Pike’s day – which was not too long ago. But I understand why you got confused. However, I was correct in saying that the ideas of the GLE predated the Articles of Union in 1813. However, before the GLE, in 1717, Masonry existed in yet another form and this style was more a “Goethe” form of Freemasonry. You took everything I said way out of proportion and attempted to make a mountain our of a mole hill.


You are assuming that I am making an assumption, which I am not. Masonry as practiced under UGLE has hardly changed at all over the period. In the US there have been more changes, but fundamentally the ritual hasn't really altered.


The days of the Great Arcanum are over friend – deal with it. And no, Masonry has changed otherwise there would not be so much confusion over the date of 1717, and others claim it goes all the way back to the Knights Templar’s and even earlier. What about a Priestess and did Freemasonry ever need one before? Ever heard abouit Cagliostro's Egyptian rite? Get my point yet?


What do you mean by UGLE-accepted? Members of UGLE or members of Grand Lodges in amity? You need to be clear as the two are very different.


Both UGLE accepted and Grand Orients. I made a claim that the Cecil Rhodes round table group consisted of men, whose lodges were under UGLE jurisdiction and now you act like I’m confused. I could care less! They were Masons and it is only you that would try and make it oh, so clear to everyone what type of Mason they are. They were Masons…so what concern do you suppose any decent person might have?


You seem to have trouble accepting the fact that freemasons do things other than freemasonry. You also like to post lists of people who were all (apparently) members of the Supreme Council of the A&A Rite, with no source. I'd like to know your source actually. So that's a NO then? How do you expect anyone to take you seriously if you can't back up your assertions?


Can a Freemason be held accountable for something and NEVER have it be connected to any Freemasonic lodge, where the activity was conspired? I hate to break it to you but YES, so can a Freemasonic lodge be shut down under the actions of certain FREEMASONS. It has already happened many times but you seem to forget that.


If you want to change freemasonry then why not go off and form your own Grand Lodge? It seems to be all the rage at the moment Your concept of its 'rightful spiritual foundation' is, I've no doubt fascinating, but you'll forgive me if I'm not overly excited about it based on your postings to date.


IF you think that a mere lodge is something to get all excited over to begin with.


Then why do you expect me to play yours? The point is clear - a negative cannot be proven and you're just miffed that you've been caught with your hand in the proverbial cookie jar, by asking questions that cannot be answered.


I made a list of men and that is all. UGLE may accept these Masonic lodges. I play no game here but you still avoid the possibility of this being something important to consider. How does anyone become so apathetic?

Notwithstanding that I have no idea what a UGLE-accepted entity is (why don't you use the same language as everyone else rather than make this stuff up? You're an obfuscator), why should I care? Freemasonry is open to all men, of all races, creeds and backgrounds, who believe in a Supreme Being and who have a sincere desire to improve themselves. It's a free world, pal.


Obviously, the idea here is that people like you often try and obfuscate everyone on which lodges are considered real Masonic lodges and which are not. Later you claim that in order for it to be accepted it must be under UGLE jurisdiction. – or did you just happen to forget that I had requested an explanation of this when starting this thread? Did not certain posters here already provide a nice definition of what is an UGLE jurisdiction form of Freemasonry? Since, they did why you acting so foolish when the only reason UGLE comes into the picture in the first place is because YOU will always deny any affiliation unless the men are from an accepted jurisdiction.


[groan]What now[/groan]. They might. What's that got to do with freemasonry?


My point was what do Freemasons have to do to ensure that bad men do not use the lodge for their own selfish purposes? Hasn’t a Masonic lodge been infiltrated before? Is this not a concern to you?


I've read your post several times and I'm still none the wiser as to what your point actually is.


What does a lodge have to offer that the Ford Foundation cannot? What does the Lodge have to offer when it has lost the very meaning of what it was first intended to serve? Since you do not know anything about Spiritual Freemasonry, it’s no surprise. Typical materialist who claims “for Freemasonry is open to all men, of all races, creeds and backgrounds, who believe in a Supreme Being and who have a sincere desire to improve themselves are a lodge” blah blah…etc” but still what does Masonry offer that the Rockefeller, or Ford Foundation cannot?


Don't you mean freemasons? Freemasonry is a system of morality, veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols. Freemasons are the membership. Freemasonry has no opinion on anything non-masonic. Freemasons have a wide variety of opinion. Again, it seems like you're getting the two mixed up.


Again, you try and put words in my mouth. Freemasonry is a lodge and a system - that is all it is. And Freemasonry is an imperfect system and the Freemason is also imperfect, so why would you assume that all conspiracies about the Freemasonic system or the Freemason are false? That is my ONLY point here.


You do like to talk in riddles don't you? Where did I imply that the past is false? I've been trying to give you a masonic history lesson but you seem to know better. Your pride is getting the better of you, my friend.


Freemasons are involved in many of the most heinous crimes in the last 300 years. The secrecy within the lodges made it easier to pull off the acts and you deny any connections to this possibility? It is you, and you alone Trinityman, who has too much pride and a foolish belief system that no conspiracy has ever transpired by a Freemason, or within the confines of a Masonic lodge.



posted on Mar, 20 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
Early Masonry was more Templar-like and modern masonry is so decadent that it barely resembles what it was like back in Pike’s day – which was not too long ago.


I would most certainly disagree, as one anyone else who has seriously studied the topic. To begin with, Masonry is much more "Templar-like" today, because Masonic Templary is a more modern invention (there was no Masonic Templary until well after the Grand Lodge at London was organized in 1717).

Secondly, there isn't an ounce of difference between Masonry today and Masonry in Pike's day, excepting only that it is larger today, and has a much greater charitable presence (which Pike himself called for many times).



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join