It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Freemason, having some doubts

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 16 2007 @ 12:33 PM
reply to post by blaqmyst

It wouldn't surprise me that some Mason somewhere made a racist comment....but it *would* surprise me to hear someone do it in open Lodge. I'm a Past Master of a Lodge in the deep south, and know full well that some of our older members hold racist views. But I've never heard anything like that open Lodge, and I've visited plenty of them.

posted on Dec, 16 2007 @ 03:05 PM
reply to post by blaqmyst

I think the all the Masons who responded feel the same as you do. We all counseled either not returng to that lodge and/or reporting the incident to the states Grand Lodge. This type of behavior is not acceptable at all, let alone in one of our Lodges.

posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 06:30 PM
Point of reference. Although one definition of "Worshipful" was given a couple posts ago, if you have a modern dictionary, you will find that "Worshipful" also is defined as: "a formal title of honor used in announcing or mentioning certain highly regarded or respected persons or groups" That is the way the Lodge uses it.

Here is another popular word that has two distinctly different meanings:

BAD - as in "This milk has been unrefridgerated for hours. It has gone BAD" but by the same token, I can say, "Man, that new paint job on your '72 Camero is BAD" (I personally would have used "Bad-ass" but lets assume there were some young kids around)

As for racism, if you are a regular Lodge and are under a Grand Lodge, chances are the people carrying on the racist comments would be brought up on unmasonic charges, and the Lodge could potentially lose their charter.

[edit on 17-12-2007 by JonathanDoe]

posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 06:51 PM
I wouldn't want to be a freemason associated with too much bugger in the early 18th century..

This was taken from the encylopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology

An occult movement of the seventeenth century. Freemasonry emerged as the British form of revived gnosticism analogous to the Rosicrucian movement in Germany. While having its roots in the architectural and construction guilds of the Middle Ages, modern masonry is rooted in the post-Reformation revival of Gnostic thought and occult practice. The mythical history of masonry served to protect it in the religiously intolerant atmosphere operative in Great Britain at the time of its founding.

History and Mythic Origin
Although it would not be exactly correct to say that the history of Freemasonry was lost in the mists of antiquity, it is possible to say that although to a certain degree traceable, its records are of a scanty nature, and so crossed by the trails of other mystical brotherhoods that disentanglement is an extremely difficult process.

The ancient legend of its foundation at the time of the building of the Temple at Jerusalem is manifestly mythical. If one might hazard an opinion, it would seem that at a very early epoch in the history of civilization, a caste arose of builders in stone, who jealously guarded the secret of their craft. Where such a caste of operative masons might have arisen is altogether a separate question, but it must obviously have been in a country where working in stone was one of the principal arts. It is also almost certain that this early brotherhood must have been hierophantic with a leadership adept in the ancient mysteries.Its principal work to begin with would undoubtedly consist in the raising of temples and similar structures, and as such it would come into very close contact with the priesthood, if indeed it was not wholly directed by it.

Plus I don't my address, phone number and what degree I would have belong to strewn throughout the warez networks of the world.. Like what a user demostrated on my site the extraterrestrial embasay Link to Free mason debate

posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 07:42 PM
reply to post by 3meo-iq

I have a hard time even understanding what the hell your talking about...

posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:17 PM
Well excuse my quick typing, if you check the link you will notice while I was developing the website, someone posted the entire main members of both the masons from italian origin as well as the main mason list of norway in excel spreadsheet also claiming that the entire list where available on emule..

ie File: Italian Masons Main Members
ie. File: Norwiegen Masons

Personally I wouldn't want my birthdate phone number, address the degree I am from etc... Being strewn across the warez network and swapped for some copyright infringment file... What a joke!

[edit on 19/12/2007 by 3meo-iq]

posted on Dec, 20 2007 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by 3meo-iq

...Ok.... where to start.

From YOUR website, your initial post on Masonry, I have no qualms with, good research was done, congrats.

The sad thing is there are government officials that are freemasons I have seen the lists of names through out the countries for freemasons well the main one anyway and I am sure of this that they shouldn’t when you’re a cult make namelist as they get about the place, and as government officials they have to sign a declaration that they are not members of a cult, I know I had to sign something like this at Sydney Ferries

The list of Freemasons within the governing bodies of the US Federal Government is pretty small, a few Senators and Congressmen, at the state level there are more, and the local level I am sure there are many, but no one bothers to make a deal of it as it has nothing to do with the craft. At the Federal level no one is forced to declare their affiliation, almost none do so "publicly" in front of congregations because Masonry is not all to well known in American society as you would expect. I am sure you would find a data base with MOST of the Masons who hold public office by someone who did the research to find out, generally not hard when your in public light no?

I heard that part of the initiation has included things like pal and puppy licking or whipped cream and a cat, maybe this is why every time I write to a politician well some of them the foot carriage seems to prompt my dad in calling me. Not that he is a mason well I don't think so has always seemed like a good Christian man not some occult devil worshipping mason.

But groups like this seem to use the dog bugger phone to move and herd the flock of civilian sheep around which involves paedophilia and other weird frats of humanology.

And that is a good example of.... childish ignorance. I wonder what some people believe... rather frightening honestly..

Hey aren't they that cult that was busted by Network Ten Called the Circle Cult, I once saw a picture of a fetus that was half dog and half human, must be from their initiation rites

That's pretty funny, I was just searching through emule and found the members list for several countries main masonic positions.. Have a look they are in excel format. Not something you would want streaming across a million computers around the world, spinning on hard drives and randomly surfacing.

Firstly, lovely to see the company you put your self around, glorious men fighting against evil Masons and the "NWO" alongside you eh?

Most of the ignorant comments by either your self or a member of your site I do not need to comment on, but the main point of your post I do..

All Grand Lodge officer positions are posted somewhere, as they are elected, they are put in Masonic journals and magazines and local papers.

No Grand Lodge has a list of all Masons, in fact, most don't even have them on online computer databases yet.. but scattered, clustered, confused and I would bet never complete.

In fact, if a true census of active Masons (paid dues and not dead) the number of Freemasons would drop significantly. Many lodges prop up membership with men who are no longer Masons or sometimes never where.

Bandy your list all you want, it is most likely false or incomplete or a combination of the two.

Also it is policy at ATS not to link your own independent discussion boards onto this board for obvious reasons.

posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 03:50 PM
Just my .02 cents:

I don't think there is anything racists about making fun of martin coons jr. day.... it is funny.... I laughed when I read it. I was more alarmed at how people get upset at other people exercising their right to freedom of speech by making a joke at the expense of a "ridiculous" holiday. Freedom of speech means that you can say what you want.....

geez, you politically correct people are pathetic.

3° A.'.F.'.A.'.M.'.
32° A.'.A.'.S.'.R.'.

posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 04:06 PM

Originally posted by euclid
Freedom of speech means that you can say what you want.....

*BUZZ* WRONG! Freedom of speech does NOT MEAN YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU WANT. Never has, never will.

You may NOT exercise your freedom of speech when exercising the right infringes upon the rights of others. I have the freedom to not hear racist comments.

Try it. Take it court. People have. They lost. I can cite the cases for you, if you want.

[edit on 31-12-2007 by LightinDarkness]

posted on Dec, 31 2007 @ 04:15 PM
reply to post by euclid

Not in the lodge room brother. No derogatory remarks should be made at any time against ANYONE .. I honestly cannot fathom how you could say that during Lodge while in session it is ok to make such a remark.

In the parking lot, in your house, over dinner, what ever, a jerk is a jerk and we can't change that. But we can stop hate from entering the Lodge room, where it has no place.

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:05 AM

Originally posted by euclid is funny.... I laughed when I read it.

It would appear that you and I do not have the same sense of humor as I found it appalling, even more so because it was an alleged Mason who made the remark.

Converations like this have no place in lodge and do nothing to promote brotherly love and universal benevolence. Perhaps your view of Masonry is far different from mine but I feel that all members of the community deserve my consideration. I am far from 'politically correct' but some statements are in poor taste regardless of ones fraternal affiliation or personal perspectives.

posted on Apr, 19 2008 @ 08:37 PM
You described many lodges of today. When I ask why they join it is for fellowship. This is association with other men who may,chances are better, that have higher values and morals. In the lodges I have been in they are very patriotic , concerned about eating, only a few with over sized egos, and a very strong concern that the words are repeated correctly. A slip of any word or movement or action that is not correct will bring most masons from their set.
This should make your understand the importance of the words. The words include the secrets of life and the beginning. It is difficult to understand, but it can be done. The men in the lodger will always valve the precision of the words.
Memorize the words, learn complete and with great concern the lectures and all the positions. Know these words and understand what the are trying to say. The masons have passed these lecture and words exactly for many years.
The words are very important and most mason will be able to repeat these words correctly. They may not understand the meaning of all the words and once you hear them, maybe the understanding will come to you. It has affected many men in the past.
Do not worry about all actions, The words must be CORRECT.

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 11:36 AM

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
reply to post by The Oak

I am curious, you state that you recently were initiated as an Entered Apprentice and then mention that you participated in your first meeting. You made no mention of being raised to Master Mason which I find curious as only Master Masons can vote and as such you would not, by the rules of the lodge, be permitted to be in the lodge room at that time. Perhaps you can clarify this error or omission for me?

[edit on 10-12-2007 by AugustusMasonicus]

This not so in my jurisdiction. Only MM can vote, however there is nothing stating that an EA or FC cannot be present at a meeting where voting takes place. As a matter of fact, this has been the case on more than one occasion at my lodge.

Edit to add: the voting was done in the 3rd, the EA/FC were asked to retire for the evening.

[edit on 21-4-2008 by AngelWitch]

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 07:47 PM
reply to post by AngelWitch

Thank you for the clarification Brother.

That would explain the discrenpancy. I always find it fascinating to learn of the differences between jurisdictions. It only further proves how Masonry in the United States is dencentralized.

[edit on 21-4-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]

posted on Apr, 21 2008 @ 11:59 PM
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

There are, I believe at current count, 18 jurisdictions in the US that allow stated meetings to be opened in the first degree, to better acquaint the newer members with the business of the lodge and how it is run. I believe in most if not all of these jurisdictions, only MMs may vote on candidates, but I'm not sure about eligibility for voting on other matters. Texas only voted to allow the stated meetings to be opened in the first degree at their most recent Grand Lodge assembly last December. My lodge has only opened a stated meeting as such once since that vote, as it is at the discretion of the WM of any particular lodge in Texas as to how he wants to conduct the business of that lodge.

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 10:06 AM
reply to post by JoshNorton

In our jurisdiction, we must open on the 3rd but may lower to 1st or 2nd if need be. We must also close on the 3rd, in which case we then ask any EA's or FC's to retire and raise to the lodge to the 3rd.

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 12:18 PM
This is not an accusation against Masons, or Christians or any group in particular but rather simply a trend I have noticed among many on these boards. But I am using this thread as an example to illustrate my point.

Now I know the Masons on this thread had their suspicions that the original poster was not a Mason and that he was simply "trolling" but later said that perhaps he was indeed a Mason, and that his concern was valid. But none the less a suspicion of his affiliation with the Masons was very Pronounced.
I also know that Many Masons who posted on this thread claim to be Christian.

So here is the question;
Why is it that the initial response to someone who says something objectionable about the philosophy or nature of his lodge, or otherwise says something or acts non masonic while claiming to be a Mason, has their Masonic "pedigree" questioned, but when someone comes to the boards and claims to be a Christian, but then goes on to misquote the Bible or act in a unchristian way people just accept and assume that the person is indeed Christian without a second thought?

I suppose I would ask (as this is a conspiracy board) is it not possible that all who claim Christianity as their faith are not indeed Christians? Maybe they are simply posing as Christians to "troll" or more sinisterly to get their anti-Christian agenda across?

[edit on 04/13/2008 by sacerd]

posted on Apr, 22 2008 @ 11:08 PM
reply to post by sacerd

Here goes, I don't remeber the exact words but the Freemasons creed (if you will) tells them that they are supposed to examine one another thoroughly before accepting that he is indeed a Freemason. Furthermore I'm sure that they are most probably guarding agianst the ever present "bait and switch" post that goes on. You know, the ones where some will start off asking things in a seemingly honest way and then turn it all around. I've seen it alot and I'm pretty new here so I'm sure they have gone through alot of it and are wary of fakers. By the I'm not a Freemason so don't get it twisted.

As far as the Christian aspect goes, I am one of those. I have had a few run inns with some that I will not mention (he may very well pop up if I do). Some that spout hateful speach in a manner of speaking, and say things like "Jesus says you should love one and hate the other." when a true Christian knows that Jesus taught "no" brand of hate, that in and of itself let me know that he wasn't a true Christian. However I can't say that I would jump down anyones throught over a misquote, I may tell them that they should spen some more time in The Word (if they are Christian) but I don't push my beliefs on anyone. Neither does GOD. It's a little thing called free will.

So, at least in my case I will argue the points of scripture with another Christian if they persist on miquoting The Word but if it's a difference of opinion about what it means I'll just let them know that I'm right and they're wrong.

[edit on 22-4-2008 by lazy1981]

posted on Apr, 23 2008 @ 01:14 AM

Originally posted by sacerd
So here is the question;
Why is it that the initial response to someone who says something objectionable about the philosophy or nature of his lodge, or otherwise says something or acts non masonic while claiming to be a Mason, has their Masonic "pedigree" questioned, but when someone comes to the boards and claims to be a Christian, but then goes on to misquote the Bible or act in a unchristian way people just accept and assume that the person is indeed Christian without a second thought?
I'm sure someone will take this wrong and run with it, but I'm going to write it anyway...

Being a Mason is supposed to mean something. We've all taken more or less the same oath. We may come from all walks of life and all parts of the world, but we've pledged to strive to be better men in some way or another. Masonry is something you have to actively seek to join, and a fair amount of memorization is required to become proficient to pass through the degrees. So if someone on ATS claims to be a Mason, the other Masons here have an expectation of at least a baseline of morals and ideals that are fairly strictly codified.

The Masons here like to say that Masonry can't be part of any big conspiracies because a lodge might bicker over whether or not to pay to have the parking lot repaved. And there's no supreme governing body that speaks for all of Masonry or hands down orders or directives. Sometimes it seems like a lot to even get a statewide Grand Lodge to agree on things.

So if you think that's disorganized, just look at something as big and diverse as Christianity. For a lot of people, religion is more passive than active. Anyone can call themselves Christian and not be questioned on it, because one person knowing the Bible better than another isn't really a valid measure of a person's faith. For every split, difference or faction of Masonry, there are probably a dozen splinters of Christianity. Heck, for every lodge there are probably a hundred churches. Yeah, determining if someone is really Christian vs someone else with a beef? Not really something that can be tested easily. And even if you could, what would you gain?

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 11:36 AM
reply to post by JoshNorton

Thats just it, (At least in my opinion) Christians are expected to have a baseline morality as well, and it is through this morality and how a Christian acts that one is supposed to identify a Christian.
i.e. "You shall know a tree by the fruit that it bares." I cant think of a single Christian Denomination that tells it's members to be a jerk LOL.

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in