Originally posted by dnaobs
The catholic church is a perfect example of an establishment perverting scripture, for their own selfish desires.

The Catholic Church are the ones who created the Scriptures. All the books in your New Testament are there because the leaders of the RCC voted them in there. Other books were discarded.

I don't think these men where decieved into believing these things, and i can't even begin to imagine how they would be. If their lying, and it is a myth, why did they die for it? Many of the apostles where tortured or killed for teaching openly about what they believed, why on earth would you risk your life for something you know to be false?

I believe that the original martyrdoms were mythological as well. Biblical scholarship has called into serious question the authorship of the Pauline Epistles, for example. Eventually, many Christians were indeed martyred, but these had nothing to do with the original texts.

I'm curious, who established your practices, and who decided what beliefs you should hold and what was true and what was false?

That would be me.

Who do you esteem as well learned, and where does your teaching come from?

Socrates, Plato, the Buddha, St. Francis of Assisi, Confucius, Lao-Tze, Jesus of Nazareth, Immanuel Kant, Albert Einstein, Baruch Spinoza, Maimonides, among others.

Do you choose what you want to believe because it supports your preconceived opinion or do you keep and open mind to the alternative?

I do keep an open mind, and I believe what I believe because there are factual, logical, and experiential reasons for doing so.

Have you ever considered that maybe the bible is true in its accounts, or do you hold the belief that these things are impossible therefore it didn't happen.

I have considered that the Bible was literally true, and was actually raised that way in a fundamentalist Christian home. I eventually had to reject many of those beliefs because they simply were not true. For example, man was not created in the form of man, but instead evolved from lower life forms over the course of millions of years. However, the creation myth of Genesis can be said to be "symbolically correct", even if we cannot accept it as a literal history.

It's good that you recognize a creator, but you have to be careful about what you hold to be truth about him.

I agree with that. We know God from His creation, i.e., by studying Nature. That's the place to look for Him, not in any books written by men only claiming to speak for God. While these books are many, they don't really tell us anything except how to organizae various cults and fight with each other over it.

How can you follow only some of christs teachings? He claimed to be god, he's either a lunatic, liar or life. Pick one because a house divided cannot stand.

I do not believe for a moment that Jesus of Nazareth ever claimed to be God. He even corrected someone that called him "good", telling them that only God (and not himself) was good.

Later on, other people certainly put their own words in Jesus' mouth. And because of this, the real, historical, and human Jesus was often (and unfortunately) left behind.

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
He's a member of the Grand Lodge of Texas.

I'm a member of the Grand Lodge of Texas. Ron Paul is not.

Are you for real, or are you just "Josh"-in me?

Maybe he just doesn't attend the same lodge that you attend

Originally posted by M74

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
So it was your intention to derail the thread?

Not my intention. My intention was to ascertain why you thought it was comical to refer to a medical doctor by the title of doctor. I just noticed this has gone on long enough.

I already explained that. Anyway, lots of doctors become Freemasons to attract more clientele. Ron Paul earned his MD at Duke University, which is a Masonic organization. He has also endorsed Doctors Without Borders, which is a socialist organiztion.

And let's no forget his racist remarks, which he now denies.

A bunch of excuses. No, he did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.
If he were such a frail old man, then why was he running for president? He was visibly exhausted in his televised appearances. He could have a heart attack!

He's a member of the Grand Lodge of Texas.

It's obvious you've never worked on a campaign. I have on the local level, for a short period of time, and I've old college friends (non-masons, for the record) who have work for presidential campaigns as well. We've seen how politicians are isolated before a public or media appearance. It's not an excuse. It's a wholly plausible, and in fact highly likely, explanation.

And again, please provide proof of his membership in any lodge.

That's to preserve his speaking voice, which would be unnecessary for the Bill Maher show, which uses microphones and doesn't require him to speak at the top of his lungs.

Obviously I don't have the list right in front of me. I go by what Masons tell me.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
I already explained that. Anyway, lots of doctors become Freemasons to attract more clientele. Ron Paul earned his MD at Duke University, which is a Masonic organization. He has also endorsed Doctors Without Borders, which is a socialist organiztion.

Is there any proof for anything you just said here? How is Duke a "Masonic organization"? For the record, my father's a doctor. I grew up involved in our local medical community because of that fact. I can only think of one doctor off the top of my head from my city who is also a Mason, and I have no reason to think his membership has attracted more clients. But you're just changing the subject. None of this changes the simple fact that Ron Paul is not a Mason. And how is a humanitarian NGO a socialist organization? And again, what does this have to do with anything?

And let's no forget his racist remarks, which he now denies.

If by "deny" you mean he admitted they were written by a ghost writer he hired, one who Dr. Paul took responsibility for and fired after his inappropriate statements were discovered.

That's to preserve his speaking voice, which would be unnecessary for the Bill Maher show, which uses microphones and doesn't require him to speak at the top of his lungs.

Obviously I don't have the list right in front of me. I go by what Masons tell me.

That's not the only reason to isolate a candidate. Campaign managers and campaign handlers keep their candidates separated from just about everybody who isn't a member of the campaign to limit the number of opportunities the candidate has to be caught "off guard" by something, in order to prevent them from saying something out of turn or from saying anything that could be taken out of context off-camera. That's their job, to safeguard the candidate. And yes, this happens backstage prior to planned appearances just as much as anywhere else. I don't doubt for a minute that they kept him secluded from the other guests prior to the show.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen

Anyway, lots of doctors become Freemasons to attract more clientele. Ron Paul earned his MD at Duke University, which is a Masonic organization. He has also endorsed Doctors Without Borders, which is a socialist organiztion.

Guys, you're wasting your time arguing with this fella. From the words I quoted above, as well as his other posts, it's obvious he's just trolling.

Originally posted by M74

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
I already explained that. Anyway, lots of doctors become Freemasons to attract more clientele. Ron Paul earned his MD at Duke University, which is a Masonic organization. He has also endorsed Doctors Without Borders, which is a socialist organiztion.

Is there any proof for anything you just said here? How is Duke a "Masonic organization"? For the record, my father's a doctor. I grew up involved in our local medical community because of that fact. I can only think of one doctor off the top of my head from my city who is also a Mason, and I have no reason to think his membership has attracted more clients. But you're just changing the subject. None of this changes the simple fact that Ron Paul is not a Mason. And how is a humanitarian NGO a socialist organization? And again, what does this have to do with anything?

Good for your father! I'm assuming he wasn't that one Freemason.

The buildings in Duke University were built in Gothic style in the 1920's, which would kinda go against its Protestant roots.

Doctors Without Borders is socialist, there's no doubt about it.

And let's not forget his racist remarks, which he now denies.

If by "deny" you mean he admitted they were written by a ghost writer he hired, one who Dr. Paul took responsibility for and fired after his inappropriate statements were discovered.

Lemme guess -- he was too busy to read his own writing, correct? Calling himself the "most conservative" candidate doesn't help. You liberal Ron Paul supporters should pull your heads out of the sands.

That's to preserve his speaking voice, which would be unnecessary for the Bill Maher show, which uses microphones and doesn't require him to speak at the top of his lungs.

Obviously I don't have the list right in front of me. I go by what Masons tell me.

That's not the only reason to isolate a candidate. Campaign managers and campaign handlers keep their candidates separate in order to prevent them from saying something out of turn or from saying anything that could be taken out of context off-camera. I don't doubt for a minute that they kept him secluded from the other guests prior to the show.

More excuses ...

Originally posted by Wertdagf
All Belief in a devine being is ignorant. You can put any name on a silly group or cult. Still useless and a waste of time.

How so?

Originally posted by doctordoom
I get a chuckle at seeing the same old players spewing jibberish, all while protecting their beloved Baphomet.

Hey stomperino, when you say gibberish, do you mean Bill the Homeless man type gibberish or gibberish as in please use smaller words because 'this is gibberish to me' gibberish?

Originally posted by doctordoom
Star for you Masonicus.

And the favor is returned for you.

By the way, the Romans lost. You know that, right?

Everyone loses in the end. I think we all know that.

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
You liberal Ron Paul supporters should pull your heads out of the sands.

Please. I am far from liberal. I find that insulting, actually. I'm a moderate conservative, at best (or worst, however you view it). Either stop trolling or get your politically ideological terms correct.

Originally posted by M74

Originally posted by vcwxvwligen
You liberal Ron Paul supporters should pull your heads out of the sands.

Please. I am far from liberal. I find that insulting, actually. I'm a moderate conservative, at best (or worst, however you view it). Either stop trolling or get your politically ideological terms correct.

I never assumed that you were a liberal. If you aren't then obviously that statement doesn't apply.

This is my first post, and also this thread is one of the first I have opened on this site. I am kind of leery as yet about the site "owning" anything one posts here. But, on the topic of this thread, I just have to say that I went into a very old and abandoned Masonic Temple a few months ago. It was quite beautiful and yet cheesy at the same time. Here is one pic I took in there that is so generic I don't care so much about losing it's "copyright".

I am sorry to not put much into the conversation as yet,..let me explore here a little, but, the topic was quite interesting to me as exploring the building took hours and was very interesting. You have to wonder why they would have spent so much building such fortresses.

This is the picture:

[img=http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q270/jtcolfax/dscn0473chair.jpg]

It's hard to tell that this is a Masonic lodge. I certainly appreciate the contribution, though.