Why are you/they called Freemasons?

Theron,
A straight answer to a straight question - I can understand you having trouble with that concept.
Why are the Freemasons called such - see my previous post.
What further point do you need?

Well, seeing as you made a statement, not a question, what is there to answer? Wr. Br. Pike made a statement, you have repeated it. Again, I ask you, what is your point?

The idea that the Freemasons of today are the descendents of the Knights Templar is not a new one... I myself tend to believe it, but many don't. Our history, being as it was, secret, is not clear. In fact, when the first grand lodge was formed in 1717, many of the extent lodges destroyed their records, so no one knows.

So, again, I ask, what is your point?

I believe his point was to answer my question. The same way your brothers have done.

Originally posted by theron dunn
Well, seeing as you made a statement, not a question, what is there to answer? Wr. Br. Pike made a statement, you have repeated it. Again, I ask you, what is your point?

Theron, for the benefit of those of us who have ignored the people to whom you're talking, could you quote their statements next time you respond to them? I know it's a nuisance, but otherwise I have to de-ignore everyone to know what you're talking about

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I'm really tempted to speculate on the answer, but I won't.

Maybe you should have- that is why they are called ' speculative masonry.'

Also, for your edification:
Prince Hall , a little different slant on some masonic 'precepts'

This used to be the ONLY way one could enter masonry in an American lodge- but I can see musch has changed.

One of the more interesting American masons was Albert Pike- note he was a 33 deg. mason

Here is one of the very many links that point out some less than savory aspects of this most interesting man.

1992 . . .drew an angry attack from freemasonic leader C. Fred Kleinknecht, who attempted to defend both Pike and the Ku Klux Klan

His most influential book, Morals and Dogma was semi-required reading for many, many years.

For all who want to know a little about freemasons get a copy of "Hiram Key" by Christopher Knight, Robert Lomas. This book has a lot of info on freemasons and their history.

As for the meaning of the word "Freemason" and the meaning that it has for me,

A stonemason uses tools, such as the square, compass, gauge, gravel and the most important, the rough ashler. These tools help build a solid foundation, straight walls, and most of all a sound structure, including a roof for protection. Nowadays masons use symbolism and allegory to do the same thing, build a solid foundation (truth and trust), straight walls (upstanding and honest people), and most of all a sound structure (the fraternity of brotherly companionship, the lodge). Free comes from, IMO, being free from the ignorance of the masses, the secrets that are bestowed upon a worthy individual will be free of the rough ashler and in place will have a perfect ashler in which one can build a great lodge. So that being said I agree with Alex on the history but I do have my own interpretation.

BTW I am not a mason as I have only put in my application, although I have been studying freemasons for about 7 years. To some of the Anti�s out there, you should do a bit more research because if you want to be taken seriously you need to have a bit more understanding of what it is you are talking about. The first thing that interested me in freemasons was an anti-mason book. For 3 years I didn�t have the internet so I had to read books, buy books and borrow books. In the last 4 years I have had the internet but MY G_D what a bunch of BS, any dumb a** can make a web site and say what ever they want, it is really sad to say the least. So to the anti-masons read a book or twenty (Besides "Morals and Dogma" as Pyke was a southern juristiction mason, which means although it is a good read it has no juristiction else where, and anyway all the "secret" parts have been taken out), then post something smart, not a half backed tale.

One last thing to all the masons that are defending yourselves, you don�t need to. If someone is worthy of being a freemason they will find you. If someone worthy of being a mason sees anti-mason stuff, they will know that it is not the truth and do their diligence and seek the truth for their own good, if they are not worthy they will not see the truth through the dark.

Peace, Love and Harmony

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

Originally posted by Corinthas
(no real proof possible of membership to the uninitiated via this text medium)

Oh really?

Go to this web page. Now scroll down to where it says "Inner Guard." See that name there? Look familiar? Notice this is Avon Glen #170 on the Grand Register of Alberta, like I've always said is my Lodge.

So if i change my screen name to steve urch i am the grand master?

Originally posted by Corinthas
So if i change my screen name to steve urch i am the grand master?

The fact that you don't know the difference between a "Grand Master" and a "Worshipful Master," and the fact that you don't even have enough respect for a Mason (and a damn good one) like Steve Urch to capitalise his name, is plenty indicative to me that you are not a Mason.

My real name is Alex Kennedy, and that has always been my screen name on this board. Many Masons on this board know me, have e-mailed me, and one has even exchanged photos and can confirm that the person in the far left of the photograph of the officers of my Lodge is me.

I don't feel, though, like I need to prove anything to you -- it's incredibly insulting to me, what you've written, as I am, in fact, Alex Kennedy, and I am, in fact, the Inner Guard of Avon Glen Lodge, and you, in fact, don't know a "Grand Master" from a "Worshipful Master" even when you READ THE WORDS YOURSELF. Anyway, just to notify you, you're on "ignore" for me now.

[edit on 30-8-2004 by AlexKennedy]

Alex:

This is what MrNecros referenced as a slander to masonry... It is clear he did not understand it, or its references, from the tone of his post.

The avowed object of the Templars was to protect the Christians who came to visit the Holy Places: their secret object was the re-building of the Temple of Solomon on the model prophesied by Ezekiel. "This re-building, formally predicted by the Judaizing Mystics of the earlier ages, had become the secret dream of the Patriarchs of the Orient. The Temple of Solomon, re-built and consecrated to the Catholic worship would become, in effect, the Metropolis of the Universe; the East would prevail over the West, and the Patriarchs of Constantinople would possess themselves of the Papal power.

"The Templars, or Poor Fellow-Soldiery of the Holy House of the Temple intended to be re-built, took as their models, in the Bible, the Warrior- Masons of Zorobabel, who worked, holding the sword in one hand and the trowel in the other. Therefore it was that the Sword and the Trowel were the insignia of the Templars, who subsequently, as will be seen, concealed themselves under the name of Brethren Masons. [This name, Fr�res Ma�ons in the French, adopted by way of secret reference to the Builders of the Second Temple, was corrupted in English into Free- Masons, as Pythagore de Crotone was into Peter Gower of Groton in England. Khair�m or Kh�r-�m, (a name mis-rendered into Hiram) from an artificer in brass and other metals, became the Chief Builder of the Haikal Kadosh, the Holy House, of the Temple, the ; and the words Bonai and Banaim yet appear in the Masonic Degrees, meaning Builder and Builders.]

"The trowel of the Templars is quadruple, and the triangular plates of it are arranged in the form of a cross, making the Kabalistic pantacle known by the name of the Cross of the East. The Knight of the East, and the Knight of the East and West, have in their titles secret allusions to the Templars of whom they were at first the successors.

"The secret thought of Hugues de Payens, in founding his Order, was not exactly to serve the ambition of the Patriarchs of Constantinople. There existed at that period in the East a Sect of Johannite Christians, who claimed to be the only true Initiates into the real mysteries of the religion of the Saviour. They pretended to know the real history of Yesus the ANOINTED, and, adopting in part the Jewish traditions and the tales of the Talmud, they held that the facts recounted in the Evangels are but allegories, the key of which Saint John gives, in saying that the world might be filled with the books that could be written upon the words and deeds of Jesus Christ; words which, they thought, would be only a ridiculous exaggeration, if he were not speaking of an allegory and a legend, that might be varied and prolonged to infinity.

"The Johannites ascribed to Saint John the foundation of their Secret Church, and the Grand Pontiffs of the Sect assumed the title of Christos, Anointed, or Consecrated, and claimed to have succeeded one another from Saint John by an uninterrupted succession of pontifical powers. He who, at the period of the foundation of the Order of the Temple, claimed these imaginary rerogatives, was named THEOCLET; he knew HUGUES DE PAYENS, he initiated him into the Mysteries and hopes of his pretended church, he seduced him by the notions of Sovereign Priesthood and Supreme royalty, and finally designated him as his successor "Thus the Order of Knights of the Temple was at its very origin devoted to the cause of opposition to the tiara of Rome and the crowns of Kings, and the Apostolate of Kabalistic Gnosticism was vested in its chiefs. For Saint John himself was the Father of the Gnostics, and the current translation of his polemic against the heretical of his Sect and the pagans who denied that Christ was the Word, is throughout a misrepresentation, or misunderstanding at least, of the whole Spirit of that Evangel.

"The tendencies and tenets of the Order were enveloped in profound mystery, and it externally professed the most perfect orthodoxy. The Chiefs alone knew the aim of the Order: the Subalterns followed them without distrust. "To acquire influence and wealth, then to intrigue, and at need to fight, to establish the Johannite or Gnostic and Kabalistic dogma, were the object and means proposed to the initiated Brethren. The Papacy and the rival monarchies, they said to them, are sold and bought in these days, become corrupt, and to-morrow, perhaps, will destroy each other. All that will become the heritage of the Temple: the World will soon come to us for its Sovereigns and Pontiffs. We shall constitute the equilibrium of the Universe, and be rulers over the Masters of the World.

"The Templars, like all other Secret Orders and Associations had two
doctrines, one concealed and reserved for the Masters, which was Johannism; the other public, which was the Roman Catholic. Thus they
deceived the adversaries whom they sought to supplant. Hence free-Masonry, vulgarly imagined to have begun with the Dionysian Architects or the German Stone-workers, adopted Saint John the Evangelist as one of its patrons, associating with him, in order not to arouse the suspicions of Rome, Saint John the Baptist, and thus covertly proclaiming itself the child of the Kabalah and Essenism together."

[edit on 30/8/04 by theron dunn]

Originally posted by Corinthas
So if i change my screen name to steve urch i am the grand master?

Originally posted by AlexKennedy

The fact that you don't know the difference between a "Grand Master" and a "Worshipful Master," and the fact that you don't even have enough respect for a Mason (and a dman good one) like Steve Urch to capitalise his name, is plenty indicative to me that you are not a Mason.

My real name is Alex Kennedy, and that has always been my screen name on this board. Many Masons on this board know me, have e-mailed me, and one has even exchanged photos and can confirm that the person in the far left of the photograph of the officers of my Lodge is me.

I don't feel, though, like I need to prove anything to you -- it's incredibly insulting to me, what you've written, as I am, in fact, Alex Kennedy, and I am, in fact, the Inner Guard of Avon Glen Lodge, and you, in fact, don't know a "Grand Master" from a "Worshipful Master" even when you READ THE WORDS YOURSELF. Anyway, just to notify you, you're on "ignore" for me now.

Gomez Addams � Addams Family, the Movie 1991
Do not fear � justice shall prevail. The courts will decide!
(fervently)
They say a man who represents himself has a fool for a client. Well, with God as my witness � I am that fool!

I�d like to represent myself on behalf of my distinguished (thanks AK, I got the check) Brother from Canada. I have communicated with him on a variety of subjects, exchanged photos, and can verify his identity, and therefore the veracity of his claim to office. Furthermore, my identity is a matter of ATS record, I attended the ATS Adventure in Michigan, was photographed, displayed my Scottish Rite Cap, and my Shrine Fez (Ooooh, a Divan Fez no less ),and most exotic of all� my ATS tin foil fez (only one in existence); even the anti-Masonic All Seeing Eye will have to confess to my humble existence.

I would also like to take the time to dispel any notion of misrepresenting yourself as a Mason, much less a Lodge Officer, or heaven forbid, a Grand Lodge Officer. A non-Mason would be unable to form a cogent post on the subject of Freemasonry, and within one, or two postings universal derision would be heaped upon the imposter (from Mason and non-Mason alike) and of course you (or anyone who tried) would be in violation of ATS �Terms and Conditions of Use�.

Looking back on my post, I see that it was full of comma splices. For that, I apologise. I will let the post stand, however, as an example to those young grammatarians (not a real word) who may follow me in the future.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
. . . anyone who tried) would be in violation of ATS �Terms and Conditions of Use�.

Where is the mason TOS?

I need to post a link to it.

Is there a catholic or republican or democrat TOS?

Originally posted by PublicGadfly
Where is the mason TOS?

I need to post a link to it.

Huh? What point are you trying to make?

Anyway, the Masonic "TOS" would be the contituion of the local Grand Lodge and the Ancient Charges. Both are available from your local Grand Lodge, usually irrespective of whether or not you are a Mason.

Is there a catholic or republican or democrat TOS?

Yes. The Catholic one is called the Bible and Catechism of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. The Republican one is called the Constitution of the United States and bylaws of the Republican Party. The Democratic one is called the Constitution of the United States and bylaws of the Democratic Party.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
. . . anyone who tried) would be in violation of ATS �Terms and Conditions of Use�.

Originally posted by PublicGadfly
Where is the mason TOS?

I need to post a link to it.

Is there a catholic or republican or democrat TOS?

Ask, and ye shall receive

Mason TOS, and TOS for anyone else for that matter.

Terms And Conditions Of Use
1.) You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

Terms And Conditions Of Use
5.) You will not to impersonate any person or entity, forge headers or otherwise manipulate identifiers in order to disguise the origin of any posting, nor collect or store personal data about other users.

That should pretty much cover it.

MM beat me to it...
Deleted redundant ATS TOS infor.

[edit on 30-8-2004 by df1]

This Alex Kenedy turkey is really starting to amuse me with 8 year old antics of running around telling everyone he's ignoring me.
I particularly like the statement asking some one to quote me so he can have a go at me withoput reading my actual post.
Deny Ignorance Through Ignorance!!!

To Alex Kennedy:

Feel insulted if you wish, that all you masons seem to be good at!

I was merely pointing out to you that your attempt to prove to me that you really are a mason is not sound. Like I said the fact that your name and the one on that site are that same COULD be coincidence. Apart from me seeing you present at my initiation, i think it will be tough to prove is what i was trying to say.
You had posted that link before, and I do indeed believe you are what you claim to be as you seem to be eager to convince me. I really couldn't care less if you were a mason or a boy-scout.

Let me stress i don't need to be convinced, I am merely pointing to the fact that you can claim a whole lot over a text medium like this.

Corinthas . . .

I have been on here for nearly a month, and Alex has made it known since my first day here that he is a Mason from Alberta, Canada. He even gave out his Lodge#. You're asserting that Alex is spending his time and effort on these boards, just to impersonate a Mason and debate with non-masons and anti-masons until he's blue in the face?? Why would he defend passoinately something he is not or does not beleive in? It would be a colossal waste of time that only a complete retard would indulge in. And if you've been reading Alex's post, he's the most eloquent, most informed, and wisest retard I've ever come across. The easier thing to do would be to admit that he is not a Mason (like) me, and still defend what he thinks is worth defending. The possibility that he is a fake Mason who is arguing from the ASSUMED position of a Mason does not enhacne his argument. It just doesn't add up, baby.

Attempting to prove that Alex is not a Mason is a complete waste of time. If you DON"T believe him, simply go about doing whatever you can on your own time to find proof. Make phone calls, do internet searches, whatever. When you're done, however, make sure you also do a google search for your common sense.

Let's have some real debate instead of playing Inspector Gadget.

I have seen Alex Kennedy and it is not the man on the picture to the far left, because he doesn�t have horns or a tail, perhaps a tail can�t see that on the picture but clearly there are no horns�

Here is my spoof brought to you by the anti free wood cutters for no tomorrow!

Bilbo

Originally posted by LTD602

Let's have some real debate instead of playing Inspector Gadget.

Mirthful Me the TOS

I appreciate the link, although I asked in semi-jest-
What I do fully appreciate is 'your' take on what may have been refered to by some. Many like to just post all encompassing links leaving to the reader to attempt to decifer what is addressed.

df1 Its an ATS TOS violation

Not sure what you are refering to- must be the recruiting angle

LTD602 Alex not a Mason

I believe Alex to be a mason- but, whether he is or not he does defend his position on masonry.

I disagree with Alex as I do the interpretation of others. Maybe the disagreement comes because I believe there exists two or three �masonrys� operating within the masonic community. (I could be such an ignoramous that I don't even recognize I'm ignorant- if so, how would I know ).

One masonry is visible to all masons- �the workers of the craft, � the craft-masons. Another visible only to a select few. This is the masonry, the existence of which I believe is real and perverse, to which the anti-mason looks.

Some, a few I suspect, are anti-mason in general. I can appreciate their position as being against secret societies and/or societies that may place ones membership above religion, country or family. I further speculate that the craft-masons as a majority will not choose their craft above their country. I have known far too many masons that are fervent nationalists.

To stay with the craft-masonry: stories abound of masons treating other masons deferentially (semi-honor) to non-masons. One of my favorites follows:

Sam Houston, the leader of rebelious Mexicans calling themselves texicans and wanting a seperate state was called to a tent after a battle. A captured enemey (Mexican) soldier claimed he had something important to tell Houston. In the tent Houston saw a private in the Mexican army. The private gave Houston a masonic sign. Houston ordered others from the tent and spent some minutes with the private.

The private was released. Later it was discovered that the private had in fact been Sant Ana, the general of the Mexican forces. Santa Ana was parolled (sent to his home nation with the condition not to make war again) because he was a mason.

Santa Ana later invaded Texas.

Here is where 'reason for distrust' of masonry takes flight. Did this really happen? Is it just an anti-masonic myth? Did Houston's actions cause Texas deaths? Is Houston or masonry responsible? Was this personal between masonic brothers or part of a masonic conspiracy?

Whether masonic-defenders want to admit it or not there are a lot of stories floating around that paint masonry in general with the brush of suspiciion. Some, many or all may be false- all may be true!

Was Benedict Arnold a mason?

Did Geo. Washington imperil the new republic because of friendship or masonic ties?

- - -
There are a lot of 'what ifs' that can be pursued. There are also a lot that are nothing more than red-herrings.