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.

 

Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy?

page: 15
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Capozzelli
There is one that says 'you will renounce your own will and in all things become obidient to the laws of our ancient institution'. Does this not concern you?


What concerns me is that someone made this up for the sole purpose of trying to vilify Freemasonry. The fact of the matter is that nothing like that appears in Masonic ritual.

Masons are indeed required to be obedient to the "laws of our ancient institution". But ours is a volunteer organization. We join it of our own free will, and remain members of our own free will. We certainly don't "renounce" our will.




posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Masonic Light
 


I'm sorry masoniclight, I misquoted the sentence, it is 'that WE will renounce our own will and in all things become obedient to the laws of our ancient institution.' Do you want to explain to me what this means to you? Does this mean that you must obey orders from others without question or without concern to what they are about?



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Capozzelli
reply to post by Masonic Light
 


I'm sorry masoniclight, I misquoted the sentence, it is 'that WE will renounce our own will and in all things become obedient to the laws of our ancient institution.' Do you want to explain to me what this means to you? Does this mean that you must obey orders from others without question or without concern to what they are about?


I think what he was saying was that he believes someone had made it up; some anti, that is. Correct me if I'm wrong Masonic Light.

At first, when I saw your post, I too looked it up. I immediately came upon the exposé of William Morgan in the 1820s. I found it in two other anti-masonic tracts at Google book search as well, and was ready to dismiss it myself on the basis of these facts alone. However, it is also in Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor: Entered Apprentice, or First Degrees. This from a faithful and authoritative Mason - as opposed to former-Masons who wish to expose the group - and it is often cited by Masons here as a primary source for what real Masonic ritual actually did or does entail.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
 


I understand. I didn't make this up. I found it on this website....

website

it is about 3/4 down under "submit your will to the orginization''. Do you think he did not know or was trying to be deceptive on purpose? I still would like an answer to my question about what this means. Do any other masons want to answer about what they think this means?

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Capozzelli]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Capozzelli
 


I'm on your side. I just told you that I found it in a real Masonic ritual book, and I even linked to it.

Your link's ultimate source is the two links I had linked to. Either they themselves got in from Morgan or they got it from Duncan. Either way, nobody has made it up. That it appears in Duncan's book of ritual, is proof enough that it is a genuine part of a Masonic ritual.


Do you think he did not know or was trying to be deceptive on purpose?


I don't know. That's for him to answer.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


" Why can no one prove a Masonic conspiracy? "




You mean, besides the FACT that the corporations

and public officials including those who run the teevee and radio

are full of masons who own and run them?

They'd be covering this EXPOSE'.

You'd expect them to pimp on their own? ...
...
...
...




besides, most of them believe the lies like you do...so, it's no great mystery why..no mystery at all.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by toasted
You mean, besides the FACT that the corporations

and public officials including those who run the teevee and radio

are full of masons who own and run them?


Being that this is a capital-letter-fact I am fairly sure you will have very little difficulty in obtaining and be quite able to substantiate your assertion by providing us with said facts.


besides, most of them believe the lies like you do...


To what lies are you refering?



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Capozzelli
 


The problem with using Duncan's ritual to find fault is that this version is not used in every jurisdiction - in fact, I'm not sure what jurisdictions still use it (does anyone know?). I know in my jurisdiction, that line never appears.

Masonic ritual changes over time - things are added and removed as the times change. That ritual does not appear in any modern version of the ritual that I can find.

But it does say something that those seeking to find fault in masonry are now trying to do so by looking at minuscule parts of the ritual (the Q&A section in this case - and the second part, when most jurisdictions only use the first part). But they ignore parts of the ritual that don't support what they are looking for. In this case, even if this version of the ritual is being used, it would be ignoring the many parts about free will, and the duty to one's family, job, religion, and country coming before masonry.

As to what it means? In MY opinion (just mine), if you look at it without trying to find fault, its pretty benign. It means we join masonry freely, and when we join we acknowledge that while we are members we are going to obey the laws we've said we would. If you look at what the masonic laws hold us to, its pretty much what you'd hope any good person would hold themselves to.

...but thats not as sexy.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


" Being that this is a capital-letter-fact I am fairly sure you will have very little difficulty in obtaining and be quite able to substantiate your assertion by providing us with said facts. "

Sorry, I'm not gonna do your homework for you. Had you done yours, prior to starting this thread, you'd already know.

I have my copy of "who's who in the elite", you're gonna have to get your own.



And the lie is, "if there was a conspiracy, it would have been proved".



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


Right. In other words you've got nothing...but you want to believe in a conspiracy, so you'd rather ignore the fact that you don't have any evidence.


[edit on 3-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
As to what it means? In MY opinion (just mine), if you look at it without trying to find fault, its pretty benign. It means we join masonry freely, and when we join we acknowledge that while we are members we are going to obey the laws we've said we would. If you look at what the masonic laws hold us to, its pretty much what you'd hope any good person would hold themselves to.


I would have to concur. For me it means that I should constantly observe the 'laws' of Freemasonry; which are never to divulge our modes of recognition, to provide Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth and to follow all the principles and tenets of the Fraternity. Nothing sinister or conspiratorial about any of those aspects.

It is difficult to extract certain lines or quotes from the ritual without them being taken out of context. The ritual is not meant to be disected and analyized on a line by line basis. It was, in my opinion, created to be viewed as a whole and this is when its full meaning and impartation of knowledge can be most felt and absorbed.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Capozzelli
I didn't make this up. I found it on this website....

website

it is about 3/4 down under "submit your will to the orginization''.


Here's a tip. Linking to Christian apologetics won't get you anywhere with Masons. They have a long history of distrust of Christians trying to expose the craft. Their skepticism and suspicion is even warranted: some ostensible Christian organizations will do anything to smear Freemasonry - even lie through their teeth! Sad, but true.

I've been burned by them as well. When I started my first conspiracy site on the web in 2000, I propagated the false quotes about Albert Pike and Mazzini, where the former is claimed to have said to the latter that the true religion of Freemasonry is Luciferianism. What the Christians neglected to tell me was that those quotes were a hoax perpetrated by a guy calling himself Leo Taxil. Anyway, it was admitted long ago by the hoaxer himself in the early 1900s - in front of the press, no less! The day I found out I'd been duped into believing the hoax myself, I immediately took down the quote. Those who continue to propagandize the Leo Taxil quotes as genuine have no integrity at all; and if they profess a higher morality - in Jesus' name, no less - then they should be ashamed of themselves. (Even the much-tauted "three world wars" quotes from Albert Pike to Mazzini have their origin in the hoax, and there is nothing in the historical record that even suggests - especially no tangible document - that Pike and Mazzini corresponded. On the contrary, most of the evidence leads me with the impression that they might have even despised one another.)

This is just an example. I don't know if the Christian site you linked to perpetuates the Taxil quotes. But if you do find a quote on a site like that (especially on conspiracy sites) the only safe thing to do is to check if its real or not. If you find the same same passage occurs in a truly Masonic instruction manual, then it is a safe bet that it's genuine and has been spoken by many a Mason, despite the fact that it comes from an old book.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by toasted
Sorry, I'm not gonna do your homework for you. Had you done yours, prior to starting this thread, you'd already know.


Of course, much easier to jump in, offer an unsubstantied opinion (which only furthers my Original Post) and quickly depart.


I have my copy of "who's who in the elite", you're gonna have to get your own.


Well since you already have a copy would it be too much of a burden upon you to post several of its pages for the people that do not already have it in their libraries?


And the lie is, "if there was a conspiracy, it would have been proved".


Which it appears still holds solidly true.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Capozzelli
 



Nice find at that link!!!

I heard a wise man, by the name of barry smith, give the definition of a mason.

He said " a mason is man who joins an organization, that he knows nothing about "

I think they get well meaning lost souls who are seeking something in their lives, [ heck it could have easily been me ] only to be snared by this insidious organization and who are also clueless to the higher goals which are not talked about at the lower levels.

Their dead former fearless leader even says the lower levels are purposely deceived in his book, morals and dogma.


[ earlier I said it could have been me, and I meant it. In the 80's I did the same thing, but I joined the rosicrucians...I didn't know what they were all about either! I stopped my membership after a short time. Imagine my surprise after doing some serious research only to find that they too were part of the mystery religions ]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by toasted

Their dead former fearless leader even says the lower levels are purposely deceived in his book, morals and dogma.



Yes indeed:


“Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be misled ...”

“The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry.” (MORALS AND DOGMA, pp. 104, 105 & 819)


Unfortunately this is the modus operandi of all secret societies (the adepts interpreting reality for the vulgar), and man being as he is a sucker for a mystery, will always indulge himself in such folly.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
 


Its most unfortunate for the anti-masons Albert Pike is not a representative of masonry. At most, he was a scholar of the Scottish Rite. His opinions are his own.

And if anyone were interested in the truth, they'd read the book and not play cherry picking with quotes out of context. If people actually take the time to read the book and understand what Pike means by religion, the quote wouldn't be as sexy. However... for all of the things he said that anti's hold high, they fail to point out anything else:



"So, when the equipoise of Reason and Faith, in the individual or the Nation, and the alternating preponderance cease, the result is, according as one or the other is permanent victor, Atheism or Superstition, disbelief or blind credulity; and the Priests either of Unfaith or of Faith become despotic.
- Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma


It seems the antis who get so fanatical over pike are teetering on the complete superstition side of things. He even saw it coming!


No matter how bad people want a masonic conspiracy, there is no penultimate representative that speaks for it for which you can use to make one up. You can try to find them attribute their quotes to all of the fraternity, but your simply incorrect. The only thing that speaks for masonry is the ritual used in each jurisdiction. That's it. And it only applies for the jurisdiction in which it is used.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightinDarkness
 


Hey, Light. Since Fire didn't want to debate you, maybe we Masons should have a Pike-off? Take two opposing viewpoints in a debate and only use out-of-context Morals & Dogma quotes to back up our positions. I'm sure something in that book could be used to mean anything one might want, if chosen correctly.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by JoshNorton
 


Excellent idea! If you don't mind, lets take it a little further:

I think by now were so well versed in the anti-masonic dogma that 2 masons could debate each other, with one taking on the anti-mason view. Were all so used to the anti-mason propaganda that we could present a "good" case:

1) Out of context pike quotes, as you suggested
1.5) Out of context Hall quotes
1.6) JFK secrecy quote
2) Use secrecy as a sign a diabolical plot is underway
3) Membership isnt always public, which we know must mean theres evil afoot
4) Use Taxil hoax quotes
5) Claim masonry is a religion, use ultra right-wing Christianity to pummel it with bible verses
6) Claim masonry is exclusive and therefore up to something, bring out the fact only guys can join, etc.
7) Claim that Crowley was a mason, use hasty generalization to paid the whole fraternity as evil, etc.

I think this would cause anti-mason members to be confused though. The anti-masons would want to desperately star the posts that had their arguments, even though it was a mason making it. Should be fun


Usually ATS debates are not judged by the quality of the argument but by the pre-conceived notions of the judges who want to further their own views - therefore, we'd be in the hilarious situation of having the anti-mason side win (which would happen no matter what).

I like it! Lets discuss over PMs.

[edit on 4-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
 


This was certainly not true in my instance. On joining Masonry I asked many questions of my lodge-mates regarding the more esoteric aspects of the Institution and met with many responses that could provide no information. I took it upon myself to discover these answers myself by immersing myself in the ritual book in attempt to further understand the meanings behind the words.

The eventual conclusion I reached was that my interpertation was very different from others that I compared it to and that what I recevied from the esoteric teachings of Masonry was not what others had taken from the very same words.

I do not think there can be a position of teaching the 'vulgar' when there is a situation of members not knowing or having various interpertations of the writings. Perhaps if we were all on the same page regarding these works it might be possible but an individual Brother may very well take something completely different then another.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fire_In_The_Minds_of_Men
At first, when I saw your post, I too looked it up. I immediately came upon the exposé of William Morgan in the 1820s. I found it in two other anti-masonic tracts at Google book search as well, and was ready to dismiss it myself on the basis of these facts alone. However, it is also in Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor: Entered Apprentice, or First Degrees. This from a faithful and authoritative Mason - as opposed to former-Masons who wish to expose the group - and it is often cited by Masons here as a primary source for what real Masonic ritual actually did or does entail.


Now that I read it within context, it makes more sense. Out of context (e.g. just posting a small snippet and adding "omg!") yes it sounds like giving up your "will" albeit a vague term out of context. Since the ritual can mean different things to different masons (as it is a personal experience) the context is all your own anyways - however I believe the "will" being spoken about here is comparable to Christians giving up their life for Christ, or giving up their ways, to be more like Christ. Giving up their "will" to act in ways unbecoming of a Christian, likewise to renounce your "own will in all things, and become obedient to the laws of our ancient institution" is to stop living for the mundane, trivial and transient - and to spend time doing more nobler things, as taught by the aforementioned ancient institution.

[edit on 4-6-2008 by scientist]



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join