Who's up for the challenge ?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:29 AM
link   
This deserves its own thread, I think.

Until one of the anti-masons actually JOINS a lodge, we'll be stuck in these back-and-forth arguments (Necros doesn't count, by the way, for obvious reasons.)

Many will not want to join, sadly. An alternative: What I can suggest is that these individuals at least meet with Masons in person, either by attending an open-house, or expressing interst in Freemasonry by e-mailing a local lodge, and meeting in person at a coffee shop or something..

I'm a bit troubled by the fact that there is real, empirical evidene to be had, yet anti-masons aren't interested in collecting it. You don't need to join, just arrange to meet some Masons in person. Sure beats the hell out of posting obscure, pointless internet links and images, right?

Perhaps these anti-masons choose not to meet Masons in person - perhaps over a coffee, because they fear that they might actually turn out to be good, decent people, and **poof**, there go all the sexy theories. Are you afraid that you miht actually LIKE what you hear? I'm sure you folks are ALOT better than people who, even when given evidence to the contrary, still hold fast to their assumptions . . right?

Case in point: I already have two sponsors, both Master Masons. At any time during our interviews I could have politely excused myself and left. If you don't like what you hear, you don't need to remain. I'm sure most people's human intuition is good enough (you're not babies) to determine in the first 10 minutes or so what kind of person you're speaking to. Most of you anti-masons are intelligent and very keen about learning (or rather, teaching, lol.) So, give yourselves some credit and move out of your theoretical bubbles.

It's about giving people a chance, really. So go ahead, meet a Mason in person. It isn't enough to simply make blanket statements about Masons using the relative anonymity of the internet. If you are so bold and brash to condemn Masons and Masonry, please have the courage to do it in person, to a Mason's face.

It's only fair, not just in terms of Masons, but anyone.




posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Interesting commentary.

It's not possible for "anti-Masons" to join a Lodge. Infiltration and expose fantasies aside, thinking this way does not really say much for a person's principles and they would find themselves compromised very early, before ever setting foot in a Lodge room.

Some people just need the feeling of being anti-something.

I used to post about being anti-stupidity and anti-corruption. The absence of these forces still drives me to an extent, but no longer into debate with other "anti-ties" at ATS.

Fortunately or unfortunately ATS is not a ground for real activism but activism is more important than cogitation, hot air and puffery.

Best wishes to anti-Masons in finding some real cause.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Any takers ? Anyone want to engage in some REAL research ?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   
So topic is for us to prove you have unlawful ties is that it?
It could be fun to reverse it and say you should prove to us that you didnt have the ties but never mind; I have all ready had that discussion.
So you are the arbiter in this thread LTD? I would like to call in a neutral one that would be my first act, I sponsor Atala, ZZZ or Masonic Light the only problem with the last one is that he wont be able to take part in the discussion and then you would loose a serious asset.

What do you say?

Bilbo



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   
The topic has nothing to do with my ties,lawful or unlawful. I'm not attempting to prove anything about myself.


Read it again.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 01:31 PM
link   
*LOL* I didnt make myself clear!

You=masons

And you want us to come with our grounded theories also if we should do this there will be no name calling and dont ridicule the posts OK?
This goes both ways.

Bilbo

I still vote for a neutral arbiter that is trusted by both sides.




[edit on 3-9-2004 by NeonHelmet]



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   


I'm a bit troubled by the fact that there is real, empirical evidene to be had, yet anti-masons aren't interested in collecting it. You don't need to join, just arrange to meet some Masons in person. Sure beats the hell out of posting obscure, pointless internet links and images, right?



You dont get out much then ?

About 18 Months ago all you could find with a search for masonic Discussion , was anti Masonic sites , today there is much more choice.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:11 PM
link   
How about getting off the internet to do research? Wow. There's a novel idea.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeonHelmet
So topic is for us to prove you have unlawful ties is that it?
It could be fun to reverse it and say you should prove to us that you didnt have the ties but never mind; I have all ready had that discussion.


Yes, and as I recall, you lost. You see, YOU are making the allegations, it is therefore incumbent upon YOU to prove them. You know you can't, so you try to turn it into a matter of us proving we are innocent, which is nonsensical.

If we are guilty, then lay it out, show us where we are guilty... WITH FACTS, not innuendo and "I think this...", but with real hard solid facts.

You can't, because there aren't any...



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:14 PM
link   
LTD is that to me or the other guy you are talking to?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:25 PM
link   
O.K.
Let me get this straight-

You want a liar to join a masonic lodge. Learn all he can learn. Report back here?
(does he get to quit or is he expelled?)

-or-
Is this some prank like a few others you (yes you) have posted into regarding masonry?

- - - -
What am I missing here?

An acknowledged liar, a self-proclaimed liar is supposed to magically become believable?

How is this going to work?

Is he supposed to provide his lodge papers?

Has to be public else he would be just like the pro-mason guys and be called sneaky and ashamed of what he did.

Will you believe what he posts?

What if someone already did!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:32 PM
link   
No, it wasn't for you. But it's proably good advice for everyone, don't you think?

All I am really saying, is that there is nothing quite comparable to speaking with someone in person, face to face. You can glean alot of information about them - their facial expressions, their friendliness (or lack thereof), and their attitude toward life. There is no substitute for real, physical contact, instead of this virtual bubble - which is nice, mind you, but still not the same.

So, if you truly want to be fair, then the only real way to do it is to witness what Masonry is physically. SEE and HEAR for yourself. If you and I were neighbours and I told you that I just bought a dog with two heads, you'd probably run over instantly in order to verify my claim, right? lol. So, you get the idea?

All you really need to do is just meet a Mason over a coffee or attend an open house. Some Lodge functions are even open to the public.

WHY OH WHY are people avoiding this obviously DEFINITVE resource??



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:34 PM
link   
O.K.
Let me get this straight-

You want a liar to join a masonic lodge. Learn all he can learn. Report back here?
(does he get to quit or is he expelled?)

-or-
Is this some prank like a few others you (yes you) have posted regarding masonry?

- - - -
What am I missing here?

An acknowledged liar, a self-proclaimed liar is supposed to magically become believable?

How is this going to work?

Is he supposed to provide his lodge papers?

Has to be public else he would be just like the pro-mason guys and be called sneaky and ashamed of what he did.

Will you believe what he posts?

What if someone already did!!!!!!!!!!!


theron
. . . if we're guilty . . .


H-e-l- l- o

READ Pike One of your own! THE southern jurisdiction leader.

P2,
How much more PROOF does it take?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Gadfly, excellent point.

I believe you and Neon, and most others here are generally decent people who are first and foremost interested MORE in the truth, than in any theories they love to espouse. I am under the impression that if they do find find the truth which happens to contradict their previous view, they will let go of that view. It's called being normal and rational.

So, I will give people the benefit of the doubt. PURE truith-seekers (you) value truth above all else. I'll trust that you'll come back here and be honest. That way, you are true to yourself and ot others. You'll be living up to your highest ideals. It;s the least I'd expect from you. I respect you, all of you enough to make these statements. I know that if you like what you see and hear, and at the least, if you are not theratened by what you see and hear, then you'll tell us and not make something up to "save face."

It's the honour system. I'm sure we can all handle that. Am I right ?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Albert Pike was a 19'th century Mason, confined tot he Southern Jurisdiction of the U.S.

This is 2004.

And granted, even if all you care to believe is Pike, then I repeat: how can my challenge hurt you ???



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
LTD,

Just a thought on the meeting-in-person idea. if you ever get something like this together, possibly even a chaired debate, it would make a great ATS radio programme. You'd need a firm chair-person mind!!



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Gadfly<

I just assumed you were interested enough and curious enough to go all the way in your mission. Sitting in front of a computer and nothing more is rather . . . . amateurish.


df1

posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Since Freemasonry appears to be a hot topic and folks keep issuing challeges, on this an other threads, I have suggested to Kano the Mod host of the debate thread to consider taking the arguement over Freemasonry to the debate thread for a series of debates on the issues involved. This would provide a neutral environment and hopefully arbitration that is fair to all concerned. If this is of interest, dropping a u2u to Kano might encourage this happen.



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by muppet
LTD,

Just a thought on the meeting-in-person idea. if you ever get something like this together, possibly even a chaired debate, it would make a great ATS radio programme. You'd need a firm chair-person mind!!


Nice idea !!!

I'd be all for that. The main reason for my idea, is so people can be more active in their research. Leave no stone unturned. I want an anti-mason to meet a Mason one-on-one in a casual environmnet. It;s about balls, courage, and fairness. As a matter of good research and sound erasoning, I do nto just look for those facts which support my theory, BUT I SEARCH FOR FACTS WHICH MIGHT ALSO DISPROVE MY THEORY.

Ahhh. Now we're talking. If I were an anti-mason, my research would never ever be complete until I either a.) actually spoke to one face to face, or b.) actually joined and witnessed things firsthand. Then, I would have looked at EVERYTHING.

Sound fair ?



posted on Sep, 3 2004 @ 03:01 PM
link   
df1:

I see where you're coming from. But I did not mean any of this for debate. There is nothing to debate. All I ask is that anti-masons meet Masons in person . . . because . . . . . ((drumroll)) it might just CHANGE THEIR MINDS. That is, if they're interested in being objective and are open to being proven worng, possibly.

For someone interested in the truth, that possiblity itself would get them up and ot of their chair: "uh oh, this might be stumbling block to my theory. I might leanr NEW information. Hell, I need to invetigatem this !!"

Dat's all. Dat's it.





new topics




 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join