Why do masons get angry at people researching their beliefs?

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unilluminist
The Freemasons don't get angry, they usually are more subtle. They crowd forums like here and drown out any meangingful discussion in Freemasonry with their talking points. Truth seekers usually get fustrated with the overwhelming amount of Freemasons here and go elsewhere to sites with less traffic, but doing that lets the Masons win, as this is one of the more active forums.
Spot on sir. I see you have a keen eye.
Masons also make up a percentage of the staff here, perhaps that has a part to play in how Masons react to research into their beliefs.




posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Actually, as a mason, the majority of the time I just sit here and shake my head. I don't particularly see any point in trying to change anyone's mind when they already have it made up, even if they're wrong.

Masonry isn't perfect, unfortunately sometimes people get in with the wrong intentions and abuse the fraternity. Sadly, conspiracy theorists are more interested in hearing and believing what one or two disgruntled masons have to say instead of listening to the vast majority who are just trying to set the facts straight.
edit on 8-8-2011 by JayTaylor because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JayTaylor
 




instead of listening to the vast majority
The "vast majority" you say? In the real world I call them sheep. It's not really so different in Masonry. Only those minute few at the top understand a larger part of the grand scheme.
edit on 8-8-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


I'm really not sure you understand how masonry is structured, it'd be really difficult to have a few elites in charge of so many independent and decentralized Grand Lodges.

I know the drill by now, I tell you that masonry isn't evil and you tell me it's because I'm clearly not a 33rd degree mason. If someone -was- to be a 33rd degree mason and told you the same thing then they'd just be called a liar.

It's also been explained ad nauseum that there are only three degrees in masonry anyhow. All these extra degrees belong to other organizations (most of which are decentralized and independent of each other as well) and wont earn you any place or special recognition outside of those organizations.

Like I said, there's really no winning if someone's already made up their mind so I'll just leave it at that. Agree to disagree, or whatever suits you.
edit on 9-8-2011 by JayTaylor because: formatting
edit on 9-8-2011 by JayTaylor because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by JayTaylor
 




I know the drill by now, I tell you that masonry isn't evil and you tell me it's because I'm clearly not a 33rd degree mason.
Please quote me saying one bad thing about Masons in this thread. Your ramblings are meaningless.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Please quote me saying one bad thing about Masons in this thread. Your ramblings are meaningless.
Why limit us to this thread? How about the time you wrote “masons are clearly a front for the Illuminati”? Or when you wrote “That's what I suspect the guys at the "top of the pyramid" want (i.e. those who are 33rd degree or above.), whether the lower Masons know it or not. Do you even know the true purpose of your "secret" society? How can you claim to support it when you wont even know what it's all REALLY about until you reach the highest levels?” (Gee, isn't that just what Jay said you would say?)




posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by JayTaylor
 


The problem is too many high level Freemasons writings contradict you like Pike, Mackey, Ronayne, M.P. Hall, among others. They talk about how the higher levels are told the true meanings of everything in Freemasonry while the Blue lodge is just for a front and the intiates are not told about the true purpose of Freemasonry.



Visible Masonry: In a circular published March 18, 1775, by the Grand Orient of France, reference is made to two divisions of the Order, namely, Visible and Invisible Masonry ... by 'Invisible Masonry' they denoted that body of intelligent and virtuous Masons who, irrespective of any connection with dogmatic authorities, constituted a 'Mysterious and Invisible Society of the True Sons of Light', who, scattered over the two hemisphere, were engaged, with one heart and soul in doing everything for the glory of the Great Architect and for the good of their fellow-men
Albert Mackey, 33rd Degree Freemason, "Encyclopaedia of Freemasonry", 1873

books.google.com... lt&resnum=4&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=invisible%20masonry&f=false




posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:45 AM
link   
Chaotic:

It's not necessary to be rude, I can look back and see that I took one of your posts out of context.

I apologize for that.




The problem is too many high level Freemasons writings contradict you like Pike, Mackey, Ronayne, M.P. Hall, among others. They talk about how the higher levels are told the true meanings of everything in Freemasonry while the Blue lodge is just for a front and the intiates are not told about the true purpose of Freemasonry.


I'm not familiar with with anyone other than Pike really, so I'll leave that to someone more knowledgeable than I. Pike was a brilliant man and I think he must have liked to flaunt that fact (see: Morals and Dogma). I can say that most of the quotes I've read from Pike's books that are used by conspiracy theorists seem to be taken out of context or simply misunderstood.

I'll also point out that being of a 'high rank' doesn't really let you speak for the fraternity as a whole. If a high level boy scout claims they worship satan does that suddenly nullify everyone's objections that they don't?

To be fair though, I'm not saying that there aren't diabolical organizations out there, they could exist. Masonry just isn't structured in a way that'd be favorable for anyone to control behind the scenes. They are independent of each other, so even if one Grand Lodge started sacrificing babies, bathing in virgins blood, having orgies, (or whatever the theory is now) it'd be limited to just that one Grand Lodge. This is the same for all Masonic organizations.


edit on 9-8-2011 by JayTaylor because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Please quote me saying one bad thing about Masons in this thread. Your ramblings are meaningless.
Why limit us to this thread? How about the time you wrote “masons are clearly a front for the Illuminati”? Or when you wrote “That's what I suspect the guys at the "top of the pyramid" want (i.e. those who are 33rd degree or above.), whether the lower Masons know it or not. Do you even know the true purpose of your "secret" society? How can you claim to support it when you wont even know what it's all REALLY about until you reach the highest levels?” (Gee, isn't that just what Jay said you would say?)

I still don't see myself saying anything particularly bad about Masonry. There I'm talking about the very top, the link between Masonry and the Illuminati - which I believe does exist. That doesn't really have much to do with Masonry in general. If you really want to know what I think about Masonry: For the most part I don't think it's "evil". My feelings are very similar to what muzzleflash states here. A lot of it comes down to materialistic ambition and ego. And a lot of misunderstandings about Masonry arises because "it's all messed up and everything is lost in translation".
edit on 9-8-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Unilluminist
 


If you continued to quote into the next paragraph, you'd notice it read

Invisible Freemasonry would then indicate the abstract spirit of Freemasonry as it has always existed, while Visible Freemasonry would refer to the concrete form which it assumes in Lodge and Chapter organizations, and in different Rites and systems.

The latter would be like the Material Church, or Church Militant; the former like the Spiritual Church, or Church Triumphant. Such terms might be found convenient to Masonic scholars and writers.
Invisible in this sense doesn't mean to hide at all…



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
I am not interested in gaining money or power, and I am not interested in using a 'club' to conspire to get ahead in life by making sure all non-club members fall behind.


Neither is anyone who becomes a Mason.


Most all people who join it do so to "further their careers" and "get connections", they are in it for one thing, materialistic ambition.


Actually, one must state on his petition that he is not seeking either of those things.


However, I believe that there is a high possibility many of these poor individuals begin to actually believe in this hocus pocus nonsense simply due to the fact their group wields power currently and so they assume it's proof of their 'correctness'.


What "power" does Freemasonry wield?


It's all a coincidence though, as their belief system is chalk full of logical fallacies and inconsistencies, like with any other cult dogma or organized group oriented around ideology.


Such as?



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Personally, I do not get angry when non-Masons research my beliefs, I welcome it. If those that do so in order to fully understand us, then I wish you luck, in fact I will halp you as far as I can or am allowed.
Of course we have things that are kept behind closed door, as do industry, churches and even Wemon's Institutes.

If you really have burning questions, and want an honest answer please just ask us.

However, if you want to make me angry, really angry, just diss my goat.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 03:00 AM
link   
I don't know enough about Masonry to make a defintive reply to your question but from what I have read on ATS almost every thread started on here seems to paint them in a negative light and that is probably true of other forums as well. Can one blame them? I don't think so! Just because an organisation has "secrets" doesn't mean it's sinister!
Why is at that there are more threads started on ATS which rant on and on about the "Masons" than the "Skull and Bones"?
I know which organisation I would rather be member of, if I wanted to join such an organisation that is!



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman
 


I actually learn much more from people saying the lies and satan/lucifer junk than I would just going to the lodge. When someone buys into the Taxil hoax and never bothers to venture any further into what masonry is, then I study, and provide some information to that person if they are interested. But I almost always learn something. If I get a hard head who just wants to pick a fight, and doesn't really want to learn anything, I do sometimes engage them for fun. But rarely get angry, just frustrated as another brother said.

Lucifer isn't mentioned anywhere I have seen in masonry except Pikes quote and he wasn't talking about the devil at all. But since he did mention the word, there will be countless people who will never bother to understand what he meant, they will blindly follow the religious zealots into believing most any lie about the fraternity. Those are the people who are best left on the outside anyway. (IMHO)



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   
This:


Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
Why do masons get angry at people researching their beliefs?


Does not equal this:


Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
How do you feel about people saying negative things about masons?




If someone is truly intersted then I would be happy to tell them about my beliefs.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Is "Lucifer" the "Morning Star"? The "Light Bearer"?

Or do all instances of Lucifer always equal Satan?

That's a good basic question to ask Masons. But I don't think anyone below 32nd degree will have a clue about it.

Don't be angry with me because I know more on average about Masons than most Masons do. I also know more about Christians than most Christians know, and I am also up to par on Scientology ahead of Scientologists.

Usually when you study a cult you find out the members of that cult are unaware of many aspects since they purposely choose to stay blind to their own group's faults and weaknesses.

If you don't have any "power" than why are the vast majority of upper management, government officials, and the wealthy part of this club? Also, why are military officers and other higher ranks always asked to join the Masons? Why is there a big M printed on their information sheets when they are Masons, and no M when they are not?

Why would the military care if someone became a Mason? Don't they clearly support it through the institution and even mark the soldiers records with the information in order to help them rise rank faster?

I am not stupid, I have seen multiple facts.

Claiming Masons do not join it to advance in life and gain connections is utter garbage. It's like cheerleaders claiming they are not doing it for popularity, or a janitor claiming he isn't doing it for the money.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by capod2t
 




It's not anger. It's frustration, because people seek their curiosity in the wrong places: The WEB.
Would you suggest a good book?


I've heard that the "Idiot's Guide to Freemasonry" and "Freemasonry for Dummies" are supposed to be quite decent primers for the non-Mason. I haven't read them myself as I was already a Mason when I heard about them.

HTH
Fitz



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman
 

I have no problem at all, but what I do have a problem with is people using religious bigotry to fuel their "research" just to besmirch my fraternity. Nor do we appreciate when someone calls us a liar when we do correct a mistaken belief.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Interesting. For me, as a Mason and as a non-Christian, the term Lucifer = Satan has very little impact on me. For me, Satan, the adversery (or the dark side) for want of a better phrase, is buried deep within the human soul. Man was given free will, therefore it is through that free will that good or evil are manifested. It does not require a horned beast to bringevil in the world, just the will of mankind.

Lucifer, the bringer of light. This could refer to any prophet that offers to enlighten the human soul. Personally, and this is not the official stance of Mansonry, I think that there is a confusion regarding the definition of Lucifer.

However, I truly believe that it is the duty of every human to be good, kind and aim to advance our culture and understanding.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by John_Rodger_Cornman
 


I've never seen any Masons on this board get angry about research and/or questions. In fact, even the ridiculous and baseless accusations are usually met with facts and openness. It usually takes quite a lot of stubborn clinging to fantasies and rumors before the Masons on this board get frustrated and stop trying to be helpful.

If you have questions about Masonry, just ask us. There are some extremely knowledgeable and helpful Masons on this board, and we actually enjoy answering questions.





new topics
 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join