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.

 

Agnostic Masons...

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by umwolves123
either way you still have to believe in a "supreme being". however we still have to vote on you after your investigation so if the lodge doesnt want someone who is a devil whorshipper (that is belief in a supreme being after all) in their lodge they would just black ball them. (this actually happened in our lodge not to long ago and he was defenatly black balled). but the rule of thumb is that you do have to believe in a supreme being.

Yes, it's certainly a point worth making that Freemasonry sets overall admission criteria, but the lodge sets its own as well. Every lodge is a private club which administrates itself and selects who it would like to be as a member from those applying. New members can be blackballed and the reason never known, although most lodges will discuss any problem with a potential candidate at the Officers Meeting before it goes to a ballot.

Private lodges have more leeway than people realize in many matters.




posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by umwolves123
but the rule of thumb is that you do have to believe in a supreme being.


Does it have to be a belief in a conscious being that is watching you and is actually comprehending the oath you are taking? What if, like myself, one believes that the 'supreme being' is the universe itself, and the energy that sustains everything in it....not an individual entity so to speak?

[edit on 29-11-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 10:48 AM
link   
No, as I mentioned before it is up to the individual to define Supreme Being. So you get to decide.



posted on Nov, 29 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Cool, that makes sense. Thanks, for answering my question.



posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   
hypothetically speaking, if there was a supreme god being, why isnt everyone his chosen people? why single out or favor a group or nation?



posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneWolf83
hypothetically speaking, if there was a supreme god being, why isnt everyone his chosen people? why single out or favor a group or nation?


Politics.


And control of others.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoneWolf83
hypothetically speaking, if there was a supreme god being, why isnt everyone his chosen people?


Who said they weren't? Not any Masonic Lodge.

To perfectly honest, there are probably quite a few people that would consider me an agnostic, or even an atheist, because I do not believe in the existence of the traditional Judeo-Christian-Islamic God. But that's not really very accurate because I do believe in a Higher Power, just not the Christian anthropomorphic version of God.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Despite the claims of some masons, there is no such thing as atheist or agnostic Freemasonry.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Masonic Light
 


this sounds like a great time to ask you this. What is your belief? I understand deist, but how about you explain it for the slow people. It will be interesting to see how many others share your point of view.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   
I'm not really a Deist. I suppose I could best be descibed as a Panentheist (not Pantheist).

Panentheism

If you've ever read "The Kybalion" by Three Initiates, it puts forth, for example, a panentheistic theology.

[edit on 1-9-2009 by Masonic Light]



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Panentheism is a belief that the Supreme Being is both to source of everything but at the same time IS everything. Its less dualistic than conventional Deism (and makes a whole lot more sense imo)



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Masonic Light
 


I would equate that to Wican. From my understanding, the wican thought is that God is in nature. My wife and I just had this discussion last night.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by network dude

I would equate that to Wican. From my understanding, the wican thought is that God is in nature. My wife and I just had this discussion last night.



Wicca is more focussed on nature whereas Panentheism is inclusive of everything....also non-nature and also the invisible source of it all.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by network dude

I would equate that to Wican. From my understanding, the wican thought is that God is in nature. My wife and I just had this discussion last night.



Wicca, I believe, would be better described as a form of pantheism instead of panentheism. The difference is that, to the pantheist, nature and God are identical. The panentheist, however, recognizes God as transcendental, filling the Universe, but also at the same time greater than the universe.

In other words, I would reject the pantheistic position that God is nature, and instead say that nature is a manifestation of God, who is in himself greater than nature.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join