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.

 

Masons and conspiracy theories

page: 21
0
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by Trinityman
There is no Eastern Star in the UK, but there are women freemasons, so lets not jump to conclusions.



Trinityman. I would just like it to be made clear that women's Freemasonry is not recognised by the United Grand Lodge of England. We have cordial relations with some organisations but do not recognise them as regular Freemasonry and intervisitation between members may not take place.

Quite correct. But the issue here is how people describe themselves rather than how UGLE describes them. The media wouldn't differentiate.

However, I think the conversation has moved on, and I've been quite enjoying watching Qui Bono and freudling pirouette so beautifully




posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by freudling
ML, you are oversimplifying things, but you know that.


I believe the oversimplification is coming from your side, and I believe that I can demonstrate it.


You do not have the power in a free society to associate with people any way you damn well please. There are laws to follow.


In a free society, there are no laws forbidding free association. But you already knew that.


the accused has a valid point and the Judge should and, according to the law, make available the lists (Freemasonary)


To begin with, Freemasonry is not on trial, and a judge has no authority to do such a thing. You say "according to the law", but your law is fictitious. It doesn't exist.


You say the Masons are not a secret society, you say it is a public fraternity.


Indeed I did.


What are you hiding from if you don't want to delcare membership in a public fraternity?


I never said anything about "hiding"; in fact, I said the exact opposite. Masons do not hide their membership, and are public about it. We have Masonic parades, charitable fundraisers, and many other such public events, and we wear our regalia publicly at them. My point is that no one in a free society can be coerced into declaring anything, which is why I charged you with simplifying the issue. Even those charged with criminal offenses are protected by the Fifth Amendment to prevent coersion.

But this is a theoretical argument only. In reality, Masons are public about their membership, just as Boy Scouts, Eagles, Woodmen, Knights of Columbus, and Oddfellows are.


Also, I have partially successfully argued on this forum that Freemasonary is not a fraternity, but rather, meets the definition of Religion.


It has previously been shown that Freemasonry cannot in itself be a religion because its members do not share the same religious beliefs, which would ipso facto prevent it from being labeled a religion. But even if it were a religion, my same argument would still stand, i.e., it is none of government's business what your or my religious beliefs are, and they do not have the right to coerce us because of them.


You must believe in a Supreme Being, whatever it is to you (total relativism), and as you move up, you come closer to Divine Illumination:


The requirement of a belief in God is not "relativism"; in fact, it's the exact opposite. Relativism would imply that one's belief about the existence of God is of no consequence. It is true that Masonry doesn't require a specific religious belief, but this isn't relativism either; if it were, it must by definition claim that all religious dogmas were equivalent, which it does not. It simp[ly states that religion is a matter between man and God, while fraternity is the relationship between man and his fellows. And I think such a statement would be difficult to contradict.

Furthermore, your argument, if correct, must also be correct when used against other organizations with the same requirements. The most famous of these is Boy Scouts of America, which likewise requires a belief in a Supreme Being, but no other religious dogma. If Masonry is a religion because of these things, the Boy Scouts must be also, which seems absurd.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
ML, I have said time and time again, What if you enter with only belief in a Supreme Being, but no knowledge of It.

Thats all I have asked regarding Freemasonry, and you make it seem like Freemasonry would teach such a person nothing (who doesn't find THEIR OWN value in it, as you have said).

Care to go from what you would learn from 4th to 32 degree, if you would?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
ML, I have said time and time again, What if you enter with only belief in a Supreme Being, but no knowledge of It.


Then you have probably lived most of your life under a rock.
Or have you never heard of religion?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 11:43 AM
link   
I never believed in something because of my parents.

Elaborate now, please.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Maybe not because of your parents... but because of the whole history of society? Because of something that has pervaded your life down to the very roots?
You don't even have to believe in a particular faith. To disown a Faith you would have to know it or at least know something about it - otherwise, why bother disowning it in the first place? Therefore, even those who have turned their back on religion have their own knowledge. It is impossible for them to have otherwise.

It is nigh on impossible for any man who believes in a Superior Being to have absolutely no knowledge of that being. Even an agnostic has knowledge - he may not know exactly what his Supreme Being is, but he has endowed it with the power of the mysterious.

But anyway, all a digression. Your intimation will be that Freemasonry contains a creed that a less knowleagable or more susceptible person would pick up and run with. That would be a theory that would be worth arguing over if one couldn't remember that Freemasonry was formed in a time when Christianity was massive. People simply couldn't enter Freemasonry without having been bombarded with the Christian message and gaining prior knowledge of a god figure from sources everywhere. It is almost impossble enough today for a person not to be affected in some way by a religion - it always shapes his faith (however small or insignificant that affectation may be). Back then, it's unthinkable. When recognised Freemasonry came along with the ritual that we have today, people were doused in Christianity. It was absolutely impossible not to have some knowledge of one's god - beit through accepting Christianity or denying it.
Your theory won't even get off the ground.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Leveller:

Thanks for the book suggestion, I have already read it. I also pointed out my Nazi heritage.

In a free society, there are no laws forbidding free association. But you already knew that.

ML said, "...associate with people any way you damn well please." You know what you said.


the accused has a valid point and the Judge should and, according to the law, make available the lists (Freemasonary)


I thought I read recently that they were going to make it required for people in the legal profession to declare membership in such societies over there. So, perhaps I am wrong. In Canada, you are not required to declare Religion and cannot be discriminated against because of your Religion: I assume it is the same in the States. However, there are excpetions. Many people are excluded from being able to practice certain Religions or be members of particular socieities. In the military, we are restricted, in rather complex ways, from involving ourselves in certain clubs/religions. Basically, don't be a member of something "Anti-Country." It also infringes on our Freedoms, like not being able to publicly announce our Political opinions, specially when they differ from the current administration. Other members of Government are subject to varying but similar things as well.

...coerced into declaring anything, which is why I charged you with simplifying the issue. Even those charged with criminal offenses are protected by the Fifth Amendment to prevent coersion.

It was a rhetorical question, and I agree, people shouldn't be coerced into declaring X.

But this is a theoretical argument only. In reality, Masons are public about their membership, just as Boy Scouts, Eagles, Woodmen, Knights of Columbus, and Oddfellows are.

So the accused in the Construction Theft case should have no trouble finding out if the Police and Judge are Freemasons. Great!

It has previously been shown that Freemasonry cannot in itself be a religion because its members do not share the same religious beliefs, which would ipso facto prevent it from being labeled a religion.

So all those one liners about helping Brothers and not lying and such are NOT universal beliefs in Masonary? Freemasonary has no universal axioms? Freemasonary leaves beliefs, religious or not, up to each member?

But even if it were a religion, my same argument would still stand, i.e., it is none of government's business what your or my religious beliefs are, and they do not have the right to coerce us because of them

Yup, I agree. However, since you think Freemasonary is not a Religion, the above comments do not apply. As for the accused, he suspects that Freemasonary has members who are practicing law (lawyers, Judges, and the lower Cops), he has a valid request and it should be met in all fairness.

Also, you are oversimplifying the Governments business and Religion bit. For example, if you are murdering animals for your Religion, it is now the Government's business. A recent example in Canada was a Native tribe wanted to sacrifice a whale off the coast of BC as part of an annual ritual. Whales are protected species in Canada. However, the Natives petitioned their case and won, being allowed to slaughter the whale. It was headline news and the sacrifice was filmed and aired on TV. If they hadn't have consulted the Government, they could have faced criminal charges.

Aside from Religion, lets just take societies and Frats. You think people shouldn't have a right to know whether their Judge or members of their Police are members of say, the KKK?

The requirement of a belief in God is not "relativism"; in fact, it's the exact opposite. Relativism would imply that one's belief about the existence of God is of no consequence. It is true that Masonry doesn't require a specific religious belief, but this isn't relativism either; if it were, it must by definition claim that all religious dogmas were equivalent, which it does not.

You are really oversimplifying the concept of relativism within the context of beliefs. God is relative to each believer since God is what God is to you. Further, each member's personal belief systems or Religion is accepted in Freemasonary. That is what I have been told about Freemasonary, so if I am incorrect about he Supreme Being being defined by each member personally, then correct me now. Therefore, multiple Religions, along with their belief systems can be found amoungst its members: one person's God could be something very different than another members. For example, a sex God and say, a non-sex God: different religions with different belief systems and different Gods. That's relative, specially when it is left up to the member to choose.

As for your comment about "all religious dogma being equivalent", that is not using the concept of relativism correctly. Relativism, like Pacifism, comes in a few different shades. At a minimum, one form of relativism aknowledges other belief systems and practices: these may be in contradiction to your own, but that does not necessarily make them morally wrong: seems in line with masonary. Extreme Relativism would imply that everything is relative. Whereas a softer relativism implies that at least some forms of, say, ediquette, are not relative (i.e. to cultures or societies)

Furthermore, your argument, if correct, must also be correct when used against other organizations with the same requirements. The most famous of these is Boy Scouts of America, which likewise requires a belief in a Supreme Being, but no other religious dogma. If Masonry is a religion because of these things, the Boy Scouts must be also, which seems absurd.

I don't think the Boy Scouts being a Religion is absurd at all, you said that.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by freudling
LIt has previously been shown that Freemasonry cannot in itself be a religion because its members do not share the same religious beliefs, which would ipso facto prevent it from being labeled a religion.

So all those one liners about helping Brothers and not lying and such are NOT universal beliefs in Masonary? Freemasonary has no universal axioms? Freemasonary leaves beliefs, religious or not, up to each member?




Wordplay.
Morality is a religion is it?

You state that if Freemasonry was a religion it would not matter in the context of your judgement, yet then you go on to try and make it into a religion so that you can judge it adversely.
You make no sense. You can't have a bite at each side of the argument and expect others to agree with you. Pick a side and stick to it.
Either Freemasonry being a religion has no bearing on the matter - in which case the subject is out of context here.
Or your religion theory does have a bearing to your negative argument - in which case you have totally contradicted yourself many times.
Which is it to be?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by freudling
I don't think the Boy Scouts being a Religion is absurd at all, you said that.



You're kidding, right? PLEASE tell me you are kidding. How is that not absurd?! I know LOTS of people who were Boy Scouts, myself included, and not one of them considers it a religion. In fact, nost would probably laugh in your face if you were to try to tell them it was.

I wonder what svcadet32 would have to say about that. If I recall he is an active Boy Scout.

You really need to get a handle on this very broad perception of religion you've got going.

You keep running around in circles, for what?



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Qui Bono
Yeah well, ill ask her then, where do you stand now.
was that the question ?

Okay, I am the DTOM in question. I came to ATS full of a lot of half-truths and misinformation about conspiracies. I voiced my distrust about the Masons. Many Masons came forward to convince me that Masonry as a group does nothing but good for the world. Good men such as Masonic Light, Leveller and The Axeman, Mirthful Me and Alex Kennedy took time out of their lives to explain what they could about Masonry.
Here is a quote of mine from the first post of this thread:

I came here to learn more about the "evil" Masons and other secret groups who plan to take over the world.


And, later on page one I say:

When I posted this topic, I was hoping to hear from Masons about certain ideas. Namely, what they came to ATS for. And what they, as Masons, thought about conspiracy theory.
I didn't expect folks to say Masons are part of NWO and perform ritual sacrifice. I wasn't looking for anti-Mason sentiment.


My friend Alex Kennedy answered this:

One thing you should know about Masonry, particularly Scottish Rite Masonry, is that it is dedicated to preventing the kind of take-over-the-world plots and attacks on liberty you're talking about. In my jurisdiction, both in the regular Lodge and in the Scottish Rite Valley, we are repeatedly admonished that we have an absolute duty to fight the tyrant and oppressor. So, if anything, Masonry is on your side against any such plots.


I remember how I felt about conspiracies when I came to ATS one year ago. I felt that a group, such as Masonry, that was blamed in conspiracy books as part of the plot to rule the world must really be involved. Conspiracy books sometimes take facts and draw conclusions that are not always accurate.
I came to ATS to deny ignorance, and seek truth. Not to get on the bandwagon and badmouth groups without a fair hearing.

What I learned from my Masonic friends lets me know that they have no hidden agendas. They have been helpful, kind, informative and humorous. They are honorable men as far as I can see. The world would be a better place if more people acted as Masons do.
I can understand their feelings when so many come here to blast their fraternity so unjustly. Try seeing it from their point of view.

@ Axeman

Most replied topic in the secret socities section? Well, I guess it shows that lots of people equate Masons with conspiracies, rightly or wrongly.



[edit on 24-2-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Yeah, shows how much has been buried in this thread.

I wonder why they're still around too, and making sure the 'truth' is known seems to be the reason of choice.

You know, the old 'accuse other people of being Know-It-Alls', and don't have to address their evidence.

I stick around to see if they have any other cards up their sleeve, bunch of one-trick Ponies .



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 09:50 PM
link   
I must say I was full of misconceptions about Masons as well but this thread has cleared a lot of them up. I'm even considering looking into my local chapter (hope that is the right word) to get more information about it and maybe on joining. Thanks to all the Masons who took time to clear up alot of the miconceptions I had.



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
Yeah, shows how much has been buried in this thread.

I wonder why they're still around too, and making sure the 'truth' is known seems to be the reason of choice.


Sounds like a damn good reason to me.


You know, the old 'accuse other people of being Know-It-Alls', and don't have to address their evidence.


Evidence? EVIDENCE?!?! Show me one shred of evidence you have shown here. Please. I dare you. I double dare you, even.


I stick around to see if they have any other cards up their sleeve, bunch of one-trick Ponies .




[edit on 2/24/05 by The Axeman]



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman




HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! I Couldn't have said it better myself!



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sebatwerk

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! I Couldn't have said it better myself!


Heheheh that never gets old...



posted on Feb, 24 2005 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Axeman

Originally posted by sebatwerk

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! I Couldn't have said it better myself!


Heheheh that never gets old...


Who thought there'd be so many pictures of trolls out there on the net. Our masonic network has alerted all graphic artists of our work here.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:20 AM
link   
We provide evidence, and then you say 'Thats not proof of wrongdoing."

As if the Courts are just towards this kind of thing. There is no Justice when drug runners are called Patriots in the USA, and its true, its happened.

Every time people that are Masons get together and plan something 'for their exclusive benefit' it is irregular Masonry and not what the regular Lodge endorses. No one who teaches or knows anything Occult acquired or fostered such knowledge in Masonry. There are so many assumptions you make in defense!

When someone has written something about Freemasonry such as Hall or Pike, we are ALWAYS wrong, and taking things out of context. It is never proof against Masonry, because we could NEVER interpret it correctly, you are the priests to the Gods.

When we suggest tactics used by Masonry are questionable, such as the swearing of oaths in God's name, or obvious evidence of political involvement (beyond the average man, despite denials) then you say they were merely doing their part. There is PROOF of Revolutions being planned in Lodges, and yet that makes you only think they were planning the freedom of the masses, not the exchange of power?

One Mason appointing another to a position of power is not proof of anything, not even nepotism in all claims made in defense of Masonry. I find that hard to believe. How can you focus on how close knit a group you are one second, and then say you don't engage in nepotism, even when evident?

Of course, in reply no one will blink an eye, lets find a picture of a troll, and thats that. Is not thinking fun?

I gave proof of a Freemason dropping an Atomic Bomb, in a symbolic location, and yet that isn't 'proof'. I'm sorry, but such is the nature of truth.

I say that the 'official' date of 1717 is merely symbolic, and nope, swear to God, there was nothing before then, well there was but it was disorganized blah blah BULL#.

I say Freemasonry loves Egyptian symbolism, including the Pyramids, and what do I get, "Phree Messen is a make believe term, you Nazi Anti Mason!"

Be serious for a second, Axeman, the others are lost already. I am lost, atleast I am looking for myself.

[edit on 25-2-2005 by akilles]



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
We provide evidence, and then you say 'Thats not proof of wrongdoing."


All you ever provide is circumstancial evidence, as if the courts are just to that kind of thing.



Every time people that are Masons get together and plan something 'for their exclusive benefit' it is irregular Masonry and not what the regular Lodge endorses.


And are we wrong by saying so?



When someone has written something about Freemasonry such as Hall or Pike, we are ALWAYS wrong, and taking things out of context. It is never proof against Masonry, because we could NEVER interpret it correctly, you are the priests to the Gods.


What I have heard (and said) more than anything is that one person does not speak for all of masonry, and that is VERY obvious by some of the things Pike and Co. have written. Some things go very much against the system of Freemasonry.



One Mason appointing another to a position of power is not proof of anything, not even nepotism in all claims made in defense of Masonry. I find that hard to believe. How can you focus on how close knit a group you are one second, and then say you don't engage in nepotism, even when evident?


CIRCUMSTANCE IS NOT EVIDENCE!! Get it straight. Yu have a very warped sense of what evidence is. The fact of the matter is that you have NO evidence about this sort of thing, you're just assuming. It could be a million different things, but you choose to link them by masonry alone. That's not very fair of you, is it?



Of course, in reply no one will blink an eye, lets find a picture of a troll, and thats that. Is not thinking fun?


Because people are tired of explaining # to you, you never listen, you dont answer challenges, people are tired of replying to your crap.



I gave proof of a Freemason dropping an Atomic Bomb, in a symbolic location, and yet that isn't 'proof'. I'm sorry, but such is the nature of truth.


YOU CALL THAT PROOF!?!?!?



I say that the 'official' date of 1717 is merely symbolic, and nope, swear to God, there was nothing before then, well there was but it was disorganized blah blah BULL#.


That date is very well documented as the date 4 lodges set up the first GRAND LODGE. It's not symbolic and you are completely mistaken.



I say Freemasonry loves Egyptian symbolism, including the Pyramids, and what do I get, "Phree Messen is a make believe term, you Nazi Anti Mason!"


Freemasonry has its own symbols... Egyptian symbology really isn't that prevalent in masonry. I had the same discussion with the master of my lodge, who's an Egyptologist at UCLA... if he doesnt agree, neither do I.

I repeat, CIRCUMSTANCE IS NOT EVIDENCE, and you need to learn the difference between the two.



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
We provide evidence, and then you say 'Thats not proof of wrongdoing."

As if the Courts are just towards this kind of thing. There is no Justice when drug runners are called Patriots in the USA, and its true, its happened.


What does that have to do with anything?


Every time people that are Masons get together and plan something 'for their exclusive benefit' it is irregular Masonry and not what the regular Lodge endorses. No one who teaches or knows anything Occult acquired or fostered such knowledge in Masonry. There are so many assumptions you make in defense!


I don't even know what you are trying to say with this paragraph dude. What "exclusive benefit" are you talking about? Masonry's teachings are occult in a sense. Occult = hidden.


When someone has written something about Freemasonry such as Hall or Pike, we are ALWAYS wrong, and taking things out of context. It is never proof against Masonry, because we could NEVER interpret it correctly, you are the priests to the Gods.


You certainly are wrong when you take quotes out of context and twist and paraphrase to suit your own needs, i.e. the defamation of Masonry. Pike and Hall are both fairly well respected authors in the Masonic world, though some Masons I know think of them as "fringe" or "controversial".


When we suggest tactics used by Masonry are questionable, such as the swearing of oaths in God's name...


Marriage anyone? Oath of Office anyone? Swearing in to the Military anyone? Boy Scouts anyone? Should I go on?


...or obvious evidence of political involvement (beyond the average man, despite denials) then you say they were merely doing their part. There is PROOF of Revolutions being planned in Lodges...


WHAT PROOF?!?! My, my, if you aren't irritating! Where's the proof?


...and yet that makes you only think they were planning the freedom of the masses, not the exchange of power?


WHAT POWER?!?!


One Mason appointing another to a position of power is not proof of anything, not even nepotism in all claims made in defense of Masonry. I find that hard to believe. How can you focus on how close knit a group you are one second, and then say you don't engage in nepotism, even when evident?


Wouldn't you want a friend, someone you know you can trust, to be by your side? I would. Where is the wrong in that?


Of course, in reply no one will blink an eye, lets find a picture of a troll, and thats that. Is not thinking fun?


I post the troll pics when you make trollish posts. Don't like it? Tough. Get used to it, or stop with the trollish remarks.


I gave proof of a Freemason dropping an Atomic Bomb, in a symbolic location, and yet that isn't 'proof'. I'm sorry, but such is the nature of truth.


You did no such thing. Proof my eye.


I say that the 'official' date of 1717 is merely symbolic, and nope, swear to God, there was nothing before then, well there was but it was disorganized blah blah BULL#.


No one has said that, this has been explained to you numerous times. What is your problem, do you have a disorder like that guy in Memento where you can't make new memories?


I say Freemasonry loves Egyptian symbolism, including the Pyramids, and what do I get, "Phree Messen is a make believe term, you Nazi Anti Mason!"


Rightly so. Show me something that backs you up. Until then, you get what you got.


Be serious for a second, Axeman, the others are lost already. I am lost, atleast I am looking for myself.


I know you are lost, but if you're looking for yourself you could have fooled me. What others?

I was lost, but fortunately I found my path. Ultimately, it has little or nothing to do with Freemasonry though. Freemasonry, like many other institutions, is a vehicle, not the Path.

[edit on 2/25/05 by The Axeman]



posted on Feb, 25 2005 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Buddy, you are the vehicle.
The tool.
The vessel.

I thought maybe you actually wanted to see what is wrong with this world, but in fact, you have chosen justifying it.

Each time you guys have to dissect a post WORD FOR F*CKIN WORD.

Can you not think any more? I am saying Masonry has been abused, and here I am being called a LIAR! This is freakin ridiculous. It is the most blatant obvious thing in history!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join