Contradiction Of The Freemasons - Please Someone Help Explain

Hello, never posted here before, but I have read quite a bit on this site, as well as studied many books. Jim Marrs is among my well-studied authors.

In reading threads of the NWO and Illuminati, as well as watching numerous documentaries and YouTube briefing, the Freemasons are pictured as being the link between the middle ages evil agendas and modern day Illuminati, Brotherhood, NWO or whatever you want to call the guys at the top.

No reason to elaborate on everything that has been stated previously.

I have no personal experience or knowledge about the Freemasons and can only note the opinions of others.

There is one major contradiction however which I have never seen explained, so if anyone could guide me in answering this it would be very appreciated.

99% of material written by non-Masons are creating an image of the highest ranking members as satanic, control freaks who wish to take over the world through ultimate control and power. Though there is evidence that such a movement is indeed taking place, there is one major contrary fact to me.

The Founding Fathers of the US Constitution were per what I know high ranking Freemasons. The Constitution must be one of the most sensible documents even written where the people actually have freedoms and a say-so in the way the country is governed. Washington, Jefferson and Adams were vehemently against the private bankers over in Europe and wrote more than a handful warnings what were to come if they got power and influence over the government and financial control.

So, not knowing the full story, this presents a 180 degree contradiction between what various people are stating about the Freemasons.

I can only conclude that some of the information is faulty, or, that there is (or at least was) in fact two forces within the Freemasonry in play - one which was truly for a democratic republic, and one for a totalitarian one-world government.

How come the dependency? What's the missing information. I don't buy that Washington, Jefferson and Adams were just chump change in the line of command within Freemasonry and weren't aware of the top degree "real" agenda. This just doesn't make sense. Being an unaware, unbriefed, lower-degree mason is usually the justification I see when raising this question, but this just doesn't make sense when it comes to our Founding Fathers.

Please someone, enlighten me on why this dependency.

Thanks, Warewhulf

Freemasonry, Rosicrucians, Wicca, all these things portrayed to be satanic are not.

Granted in the Founding Father's time, Freemasonry was well known. It was the modern day Mystery School. They learned everything from advanced maths, to reading the stars, Hermetic Philosophies, master craftsmanship, alchemy, and much more. One reason for all the negativity is there is much evidence that points that the Bavarian Illuminati infiltrated Freemasonry's highest level. It's just speculation but you never know. I don't personally know anyone that was or is a high ranking freemason.

Lol you knew all that. Well, most believe the infiltration took place after the formation of the United States of America. Hell, some believe washington and Adam were the same guy

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Regardless of what you believe happened, Freemasonry is not evil, nor does it aim to control any part of the world. Freemasonry would rather be less known but many people wanted to join prompting the opening up of certain lodges. Some things you just have to go out and research my friend. Research from as many angles as you can, even if you have to take part in it yourself.


Oh lol. And welcome to ATS!

reply to post by mr10k


Thanks!

I actually don't "believe" one way or the other about the Freemasons as I only can note the opinions of others. My original question was based on the discrepancy of my own observations.

No doubt gaining first-hand experience would be the ultimate answer, however obtaining a 33'rd degree level is just a bit inconvenient for me at this moment.

I do not think personally that they are satanic either. It is so easy to assign all kinds of significances to symbols. I can take any set of symbols and I by relating them to other known significances I can "prove" such and so about those symbols.

There a lot of sense to your statement that the Bavarian Illuminati infiltrated Freemasonry and it even matches time-wise as they would have started the infiltration around the time of the declaration of independence, i.e. the American Founding Fathers would not have been subject to that infiltration.

My question is if this split in aims, goals and stated purpose still exist as two factions within the Freemasonry?

Though Dan Brown is a fiction writer, there was a good sense of truth in the historical background to the DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons. Based on this I can only surmise that there is some truth to his research and observation of the Freemasons in his book The Symbol, where the Freemasons are depicted very different from the likes of David Icke and the likes, who also have a lot of sense in much of what they are saying.

As I consider the Catholic Church nothing but a control-vehicle and for no constructive purposes of the people, any enemy to the Catholic Church would by my friend. Note that I mean the organized church and not Christianity as such.

Also, in studying the gospel of Thomas which is deemed heresy by the Catholic Church and the various conspiracy theories regarding Jesus, it also seems to me that he was advocating common sense, just like the Buddha and many others and spreading actual truths, which had to be hidden from the masses for reasons of population control and absolute power, and it also seems to me that these basic truths may have been gobbled up and kept preserved, though hidden by the Knights Templar and later Freemasons, etc. This would actually be common sense, universal truths that would free man from the ignorance imposed upon us by those with lesser good intentions.

The subject of Satan and the fallen angels are also embedded in deep symbolism. From a Catholic perspective, anyone and anything which would threaten their home-made doctrines would be called "the fruits of Satan", but from my perspective things or people would actually be for the greater good. So is Satan really the evil the currently edited and altered version of the Bible (and actually more interpretation than literal statements thereof) proffers this to be?

There is much propaganda and symbolism here which is little understood and very confused and very misinterpreted from what I can see. There are also two forces in play, as I originally stated, and from which I can see one who knows and wants to put in place the actual truths of man, its origins and our history, and another which means to suppress our knowledge and keep man in slavery and ignorance with ultimate control and power as the aim.

This juxtaposition couldn't emanate from one and the same source and organization?

So any more enlightenment on this would be appreciated.

Thanks, Warewhulf

reply to post by warewhulf


Hi ware,

I think for some reason freemasons are being tarnished and blackened by people who would like the freemasons to take the blame for the evil in this world.

I believe that the freemasons stand for decency and good.

Just my gut feeling.

reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone


Hi there,

You know, I feel the same. Though I believe they have been infiltrated like everybody else, and hence some "Freemasons" are part of the "bad boys". The trick is to differentiate and that's a very hard task, especially listening to people who only advocate black or white. The doctrine of absolutes just never seem to work out in reality, as life is not itself defined in terms of black and white, but in terms of gradients of all aspects, and the only way to walk is one step at the time, and there are a lot of distractions on the way pointing you off the road.

I'm trying to stay on the road, and siphon out the truths from the lies and it is VERY hard with VERY many speculations and opinions and texts riddled with false information, but I try...

Hi Warehulf

Interesting post. As a Mason, perhaps I should point out a few discrepancies and facts, and then let you make your own decision on the nature of the "Upper Levels"

Originally posted by warewhulf
I don't buy that Washington, Jefferson and Adams were just chump change in the line of command within Freemasonry and weren't aware of the top degree "real" agenda. This just doesn't make sense. Being an unaware, unbriefed, lower-degree mason is usually the justification I see when raising this question, but this just doesn't make sense when it comes to our Founding Fathers.

Although your argument supports Freemasonry, I have to admit that your assumption here is incorrect. Rank in Freemasonry certainly does not translate into rank in the outside world or vice versa. For example, the head of Freemasonry my district is simply a Jeweler, who has his own small business. In my Royal Arch Chapter, there is a three-star general, a foreign ambassador and a city Councillor who are below me in rank, whereas I am merely a university lecturer.

99% of material written by non-Masons are creating an image of the highest ranking members as satanic, control freaks who wish to take over the world through ultimate control and power. Though there is evidence that such a movement is indeed taking place, there is one major contrary fact to me.

Here, there are a number of things which I should point out...

1) It is not really 99% of anti-masons who believe this - the websites that make these claims are one or two fanatic Christian sites which have somehow been promoted to the top of Google searches. Since these two or three sites are usually the ones that people read first, it is easy to assume that the majority of anti-masons feel the same way.

2) The anti-masons who claim that there is a satanic ring at the top claim that this is run by 33° Masons. The numbering system which has 33° at the top is the Scottish rite, which is primarily an American order. Outside of America, the Scottish rite is rare, and there is an equivalent of the York Rite, which is by far favored over the Scottish Rite, and consists of the Holy Royal Arch, Red Cross of Constantine and the Knights Templar. These Orders have no numbering system, and yet, the heads of Freemasonry globally (outside of America) tend to join these (if any) rather than the Scottish Rite (in particular, the Holy Royal Arch is favoured.)

3) The Scottish rite, and the English equivalent, the Rose Croix, is a Christian degree. In order to join the Rose Croix, the candidate must make a declaration that he accepts the Divinity of Christ and a belief in the Christian Trinity. Any non-Christian, Pagan, Wiccan etc may not join the order. Seems funny to allow only Christians, if the ultimate goal is anti-Christian.

4) The highest rank in Freemasonry is the 3rd degree or Master Mason degree. The other Orders have no bearing on Masonic Rank. There are offices in Freemasonry which are held by Master Masons and these officers hold rank over any of the additional Orders such as the Scottish Rite. For example, the Master of a Lodge, even if he is only only a 3rd degree Mason, may expel a 33° Mason, if he so wishes. In fact, if he wanted to, he even has the power to expel the Sovereign Grand Commander of the Supreme Council, should he belong to that Lodge. It is hard for non-Masons to understand the structure of rank within Freemasonry, since it is very complicated, and is not a linear progression, but has sideways branches. Due to this difficulty, non-Masons tend to automatically place value on numbering within the various orders, since it seems familiar, but this is wrong.

For example, in my university, I may get the following degrees:

Bachelor of Science Degree (analogous to 3°)
Honours degree in Science (analogous to 18°)
Master of Science (analogous to 30°)
Doctor of Science (analogous to 32°)
Professor of Science (Honorary position within the university, analogous to 33°)

However, the head of my department, even though he hold only a Bachelor of Science degree (analogous to the Master of a Lodge), may fire me if he wishes.

5) To date, other than using numbering, none of the anti-Masons either on ATS, nor on any of the anti-Mason sites have been able to define the "upper levels of Masonry". Even those who choose the numbering of a side-order (Scottish Rite) which has no bearing on rank in Freemasonry, cannot explain why the deem the Scottish Rite to be more important than other side orders, and also not why an Mason who is in the Egyptian Rite of Memphis, and therefore may have a number up to 99°, is not higher than a mere 33°.

My challenge to you, in light of what I have said above, is to find try and find a valid definition of what a "High Level Mason" might be, and when you fail to do so, the answer to your own question should become a lot clearer to you from your own research.

reply to post by warewhulf


Well, you are using critcal thinking and rational though to find your answers. That is strictly forbidden in anti-masonry circles.

In order to join masonry, you must profess a belief in one creator, God if you will. So without me telling you anything, does it even make sense that you would be required to believe and worship God, only to be forced to worship Satan once you "reach the higher levels"?

And when thinking about the charges against Freemasonry, think about who was first to accuse them. If it were a group of carpenters, they might have accused us of being hammer thiefs. If it was a group of Butchers, they might have accused us of being cattle rustlers, but since it was the Church at it's highest levels, we became satanists. How convenient. Even when all the original charges were debunked, things like the Taxil hoax get quoted and passed on as fact even today.

The only way to know anything for sure is to be a part of it.

And I don't believe the Illuminati was evil either. They were men who were against the church forcing it's views of science on the public and outlawing rational thought. The Illuminati went against the biggest superpower at the time and didn't loose. (at first) So they were feared and subsequently labeled evil by the church. (are you seeing a pattern yet?) They were radical and very well may have had a hand in the French revolution. Some would argue that the outcome was favorable for the people of France, some would not. EIther way, they did something about what they saw wrong with the world. Read up on them, but try to read history, and not hate.
here is an excellent place to start.

But remember, I am a Freemason, so I cannot be trusted.

Originally posted by warewhulf
The Founding Fathers of the US Constitution were per what I know high ranking Freemasons.

First, as others have mentioned, there's no such thing as a "high ranking Freemason." One of the basic truths of Freemasonry is that we all meet on the same level.

Moving away from Founding Fathers and looking at US Presidents who were Masons for a moment, even if you went to elected offices, George Washington was Worshipful Master of his lodge for one year, whereas Andrew Jackson was the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Tennessee from 1822 to 1824, 5 years before he became president. I believe Harry Truman was the first US President to receive the Scottish Rite 33°, if you want to ascribe "rank" to such an honor. He had also been Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Missouri. I believe Ford was the only other US President to receive 33° Scottish Rite honors.

reply to post by Saurus


Hi Saurus,

I'm very thankful for your reply.

First off I must say that I really haven't formed much of an opinion and am merely curious.

Second, I have no interest in finding what the 33rd degree amounts to as I will only find hypothetical answers at best and nobody is going to tell me the truth, and if someone profess to do so I have no way of verifying it.

I get a general idea of your description of the ranking system within Freemasonry. I also have a surface understanding of the various branches or Rites.

Now with you involved in this thread, I would like to re-phrase my original question, but let me tell you what I have surmised so far.

I believe the general air and attitude of the Masons as laid out in Dan Brown's book The Symbol is probably very close to the truth. Don't know why I get that idea, but nevertheless I do. I don't believe Freemasons are satanic, and I may have exaggerated the amount of places which states such.

I was surprised to hear that the Scottish Rite supports the Holy Trinity. I thought this was one of the major lies which alleged Priory members (Freemasons?) like DaVinci, etc were so against, including all the material on the Knights Templar going back to the Jesus bloodline, etc. It was my understanding the Freemasons, at least some Rites were Christian but I thought they were at odds with the Catholic view. Could you elaborate on this.

So, outside of some Christian anti Mason people, why do the Freemasons always come up in conspiracy talk linking the Illuminati (not the Bavarian one) but the NWO synonymous agenda which is linked to CFR, Bilderberger, Skull & Bones, etc? This is the main discrepancy which made me post my original question.

I enjoyed reading Jim Marrs' Rule By Secrecy which was a fairly objective account of available research and the Freemasons are not described in detail, but more so some member's connections to other societies, etc.

Is there any reference which is available which you as a Mason would recommend that I read?

Thanks for laying this out for me!

reply to post by JoshNorton


Thanks Josh,

You wrote, "George Washington was Worshipful Master of his lodge for one year." How is this title defined within the ranks of Masons?

Originally posted by warewhulf
I was surprised to hear that the Scottish Rite supports the Holy Trinity.

This is not true in my jurisdiction as the Scottish Rite is much more secular.

reply to post by network dude


Thanks Network Dude,

No, I personally don't believe the Satanic stuff and you're right - it doesn't make much sense.

You wrote, "In order to join masonry, you must profess a belief in one creator, God if you will. So without me telling you anything, does it even make sense that you would be required to believe and worship God, only to be forced to worship Satan once you "reach the higher levels"? "

Does that mean a Creator or Supreme Being as a concept and not necessarily the "God" as described as residing in Heaven in the Bible? I.e. is the Biblical God the one you have to profess a belief in, or is it acceptable to have a belief in a Creator, no matter the identity of such?

Interesting what you say about the Illuminati. I got the same idea from the historical research I did, but it gets confusing when the Bavarian Illuminati is identified with the current NWO as the two seem to have a vastly different agenda.

Could you elaborate on this and the difference between the historical Illuminati and what they call "Illuminate" in today's conspiracy threads?

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Could you elaborate on your view of this?

Originally posted by warewhulf
...is it acceptable to have a belief in a Creator, no matter the identity of such?

Yes.

Originally posted by warewhulf
Could you elaborate on your view of this?

In what regard?

Originally posted by warewhulf

You wrote, "George Washington was Worshipful Master of his lodge for one year." How is this title defined within the ranks of Masons?

The "Worshipful Master" is the title of the presiding officer of a Masonic Lodge. In other organizations, he would be called "President". In most jurisdictions, the Worshipful Master is elected for a one year term. Those who have previously served in this office are called Past Masters.

Originally posted by warewhulf

You wrote, "In order to join masonry, you must profess a belief in one creator, God if you will. So without me telling you anything, does it even make sense that you would be required to believe and worship God, only to be forced to worship Satan once you "reach the higher levels"? "

In Masonic terminology, one is required to believe in the existence of a "Supreme Being". The belief in the existence of Satan is limited to Christians, Jews, and Muslims, none of whom believe that Satan is the Supreme Being.

Does that mean a Creator or Supreme Being as a concept and not necessarily the "God" as described as residing in Heaven in the Bible?

Yes, that is correct.

is the Biblical God the one you have to profess a belief in, or is it acceptable to have a belief in a Creator, no matter the identity of such?

One must believe in the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Other than that, the Masonic fraternity does not try to dictate to its members what to believe.

Originally posted by warewhulf

I was surprised to hear that the Scottish Rite supports the Holy Trinity.

The Scottish Rite in England requires that candidates be Trinitarian Christians. This is not the case for the Scottish Rite in the United States and Canada.

Brother Albert Pike, Past Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States, was a prolific writer on the concept of the Trinity. He points out that many religions held trinitarian beliefs, and that Plato argued in favor of Trinitarianism in his "Republic". It is likely that the Christian dogma of the Trinity was borrowed from and influenced by pre-Christian sources.

reply to post by Masonic Light


Thanks Masonic Light (and others who answered the same question),

So other than the Scottish Rite in England, with my acknowledgment of a creator or supreme being, and a belief in the brotherhood of man, but no belief in the Holy Trinity, this would then qualify me as a Freemason, right?

Now, to the question that is left unanswered; why is the Freemasons so often made analogous to the NWO and the bad aspects of what's happening to the world? I know this is a generality, but I have seen this mentioned often enough.

I know people have a tendency to identify instead of differentiating, and this is not the case with me, but I'm curious what your views are on this. All people, activities and groups who pose a threat to those who seek totalitarian power have been attacked.

Why the constant association with the modern Illuminati and the NWO?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

This is not true in my jurisdiction as the Scottish Rite is much more secular.

For the benefit of the OP, I should probably state here that I am not from America and speak only on behalf on English Freemasonry (ie. Freemasonry that falls under the Grand Lodge of England, UGLE). This Christian trinity requirement also includes all UGLE Lodges in the USA, but not necessarily all/any other constitutions in America. My USA brethren will have to help you more in that regard.