The Secret of Freemasonry Seen in the Reflection of a Mirror - What do you see?

reply to post by W3RLIED2

The 33 degree in masonry is not a 'petitioned' degree. It's and honorary, highly prestigious Masonic title that can only be gifted to a member of the Scottish rite for his labors as a mason. And to be honest, I have only met one 33 degree mason that seemed to have an inflated ego about his title. I've met several, and they were all very humble and down to earth.... 'cept one. But that's not a story for Ats

I agree! I've got several 33rd Degree friends, and they are the most humble, hard-working and charitable folks you will ever meet. Very Christian (just for the record, not really significant), and very open and willing to assist anyone who asks.

In fact, earlier today I was hanging up a hand-made gavel that was gifted to me when I became a WM. The small medallion on the gavel is inscribed for the man that gave it to me, and he was a 33rd degree Mason, and a Past District Deputy Grand Master, and he held a Gold Card, and he often did lectures, and even as he was dying of cancer, he was still visiting all of the home-bound brethren and making hospital visits and coming to Lodge and assisting folks with their catechisms.

Sadly, he and his brother both passed away from Cancer within a few months of one another and we lost some dear friends and wonderful brother Masons, but the point is, they had no ego, and no special agenda, and no secrets they wouldn't share.

Originally posted by Conspirus
Worldwide Evil and Misery: The Legacy of the 13 Satanic Bloodlines

I have independent confirmation that Springmeier's book is full of lies. I've even caught a handful myself. His book is useless as a source.

Schnoebelen discredits himself, as others have mentioned.

I don't know the Carlisle piece, but it seems unlikely.

Originally posted by Kyobosha

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by Conspirus
With a human being there’s an enormous amount of energy released.” Bill Schnoebelen

Well there's a trustworthy source!

As soon as Bill's name came up, the die was cast on the 'quality' of your posts.

Fitz

If you are specifically referring to the energy portion of the post, there are many other sources (mainstream as well) that believe in this energy concept. Either way, many other sources have been thrown out there other than Bill. This one source says nothing about the quality of the other posts.

However, if the quality of these other 'sources' have been as diligent investigated as the investigation has been with Bill Schnoebelen, then these other 'sources' are as worthless. Given Schnoebelen's past of claiming to be many controversial things in a relatively short span of time (some of them diametrically opposed to each other at the same time), does it not cross your mind that maybe just maybe he's a religious carny preaching whatever the choir wants to hear?

If Schnoebelen claimed the sun was shining, I'd doublecheck that

Fitz

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by Kyobosha

 

Ok I'll narrow it down. You were not wrong about the general structure of freemasonry. Please allow me take that one back.

In my personal experience, though, I have still yet to meet a Satan worshipping Mason. I won't be the guy that says they don't exist...... But I will be the guy to say they have to be pretty rare. Brotherly love, relief, and truth doesn't exactly sound like a satanic creed so I'm unsure as to why a satanist would become a mason.

Plus a Mason prays and gives homage to the beneficent all-powerful Creator of all that is, whose Divine Will has been expressed through the VSL. I'm not seeing that washing if one were a Satanist.

Mind you, I could be wrong about Satanism. I've been wrong about many things before.

Fitz

Originally posted by Conspirus
Only reason I brought up FDR putting it on the dollar is because he was not a Christian...

Roosevelt was an Episcopalian, which most certainly made his a Christian.

...and the fact that it’s on a monetary note that says “In God we Trust” has nothing to with it being Christian.

Considering the motto did not appear on paper currency until 1957 I do not see the relevance to Roosevelt.

Because other than that, any staunch instance where one might remotely call it as being a Christian symbol is on a painting whose author isn’t even proven to be Christian...

So what religion do you postulate Contormo to be if he is not Christian?

OR in churches/cathedrals that can either be traced back to sacred geometry architecture or to the Vatican‘s history.

Which does not negate their relevance as all cathedrals are built using geometery and Roman Catholocism was and is the largest denomination of Christianity. The symbol was and is used by Christians to denote the Trinity.

Again, never did I say FDR created it or that that was the first instance it was used, he WAS the first to put it on the dollar though but created it?

And? What is the relevance?

Far from it - it is a symbol that has been treasured by secret societies since ancient times

How about citing some examples.

Originally posted by Conspirus
Even if it may have been used once or twice in Christianity (the Vatican/Roman Catholics is a separate story altogether), it is more predominantly known as a pagan symbol.

It is used much more than 'once or twice' so stop deflecting. And again, just because you have an issue with the Roman Catholic Church does not diminsh the fact that it was and is used as a Christian symbol. The usage of an eye in a triangle does not date back to Egypt and can be traced to Renaissance artists who used it to depict the Trinity and the Eye of God (which is mentioned in Psalms 33:18).

If you have evidence of this iconography (eye in a triangle) dating to before the Renaissance then please post it.

Originally posted by Conspirus
The key phrase in your Matthew 5:17-18 is “but to fulfill them.” To fulfill, in greek, is pleroo, which is the same word used when filling up a glass with water, or a void with something - so in essence he is saying he completed it so it no longer had to be followed with the rigidity it was before.

That is your personal interpretation and not what the allegory in the scriptures is conveying. "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid" is pretty clear in its implication. As Heaven and Earth, as far as I can tell, did not pass away in Jesus' time the smallest part of the letter of the Law was not made invalid (of fulfilled as you seem to think).

As for Matt. 23, Jesus is commanding them to obey the Pharisees because they are the authority as they sit in Moses’ seat. As for verse 3, Jesus is telling them not to be like them because they’re hypocrites, as they followed the law with no heart; and if you do some research you will find the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, were related to the mystery religions.

Yes, they were hypocrites as the practiced the Law but did not follow the Law. Jesus was admonishing them not to be hypocrites and practice the Law while also adhering to the Law. Jesus was a Jew and therefore would have followed Mosaic Law.

Christians like to pick and choose between the Biblical Laws and apply the ones that fit their lifestyle the best. As an example, Paul, in Galatians, admonishes that anyone who is circumcised will not gain entry into Heaven. Most males in the United States are circumcised and being that the predominate religion here is Christianity, most males, according to the New Testament are going to Hell. Pack your SPF 1,000,000 and say hello to your foreskin when you see it.

Originally posted by Kyobosha
As Conspirus pointed out you need to understand the meaning of 'fulfill' in that verse. Fulfill in this case means to complete a contract essentially. With Jesus came salvation by faith not works. The law wasn't destroyed but the contract had been fulfilled by Jesus. Not sure why you keep pushing to get the 'anti-adultery' stones ready, I most assuredly don't have one nor do I need one.

That is also your personal opinion. Jesus was very clear that not one letter of the law would be changed. This is the Christian-lite approach to the Bible, pick and choosing some from column A and some from column B and omitting what does not allow them to live the lifestyle they happen to desire. If you notice Jesus never adds or subtracts from any laws in the Bible, it can be deduced that, since Jesus was Jewish, and lived in a Jewish state, that he adhered to Jewish laws otherwise he would have been stoned to death long before he was crucified.

The pharisees treated tradition as an equal authority to Scripture. They essentially added 'laws' to God's word which goes against the 'Law'. The pharisees also were very self righteous and reduced to their relationship with God to a legalistic list of rules and rituals. They believed in the Law correctly but failed to live by it appropriately.

I am not agruing that point. Jesus was pointing out their hypocrisy and admonishing that the people not act like them but follow God's laws as well as enforce them.

Originally posted by Kyobosha
If you really want to be technical (which by the way has no bearing in the argument) practicing can absolutely be used in the past tense. Why does tense matter really? Just because they are dead now means they never had an affect on society? You seem like an intelligent person, so please don't be so naive to argue trivial things such as tenses.

The tense is important as there are very few Masons in what can be considered 'positions of power' so I fail to see how they can be 'affecting society' as was postulated. When you are dead your continued influence on society is severly curtailed by your poor state of constitution.

Originally posted by Kyobosha
Remember that generally to be accepted as into the fraternity you need to believe in a supreme being. However, who that supreme being is can be interpereted by the member in any way. In other words, the supreme being could be God or Satan to that person, it just depends who they consider supreme.

As Satan was created by God how can Satan be a 'supreme being'? (This also goes to you getreadyalready)


If I somehow became aware that a petitioning member believed that the Biblical Satan was their 'supreme being' I would not vote in favor of their membership based on the fact that the Biblical Satan is subordinate to God.

Originally posted by KSigMason
So you believed some guy who escaped from a mental ward?

The fallen watchers are geniuses. They are a bit like Star Trek Spock's with a slight sense of humour. 8ft, blonde hair.
So go ahead, ask an extremely technical question and I will forward it on to him.

The response could range between 1 day to 1 week, depending on how many spiritual attacks the elite send their way in the next week.

Please make sure that the question cannot in any way be found in todays literature and is still a mad scientist idea that has not been documented or made available to public eyes.
This will prove that I havn't just done a google search.

my posts give an idea as to what sort of knowledge I can ask for:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

However, what is the point of asking? The answer is going to fall on deaf ears anyway, isn't it ?

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

As Satan was created by God how can Satan be a 'supreme being'? (This also goes to you getreadyalready)


If I somehow became aware that a petitioning member believed that the Biblical Satan was their 'supreme being' I would not vote in favor of their membership based on the fact that the Biblical Satan is subordinate to God.

Good point. And personally, I'm speaking more of Lucifer than Satan, but your point is still valid. I view Jesus in that same context though, and I could still vote in favor of someone that worships Jesus, yet I don't view Jesus as a Supreme Being in the same sense as the Creator.

I believe someone can acknowledge there is only one Supreme Creator, but they can choose to follow the teachings of Buddha, or Jesus, or Muhammad, and they can still find success in such a religion. I also believe one can believe in a single Supreme Creator, but believe as a Wiccan believes, or as a Luciferian and still find success in life and Masonry, as long as what we embody in Masonry is similar to the core concepts of their religion's teachings.

Satanism would NOT fall in that category.

reply to post by Rapha


Rapha, this is interesting, and it sounds familiar to what little I know of Shambhala. I am going to ponder this and pose a profound question for you to relay to these folks you communicate with. I'll PM you a little later.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I view Jesus in that same context though, and I could still vote in favor of someone that worships Jesus, yet I don't view Jesus as a Supreme Being in the same sense as the Creator.

The rub is that a Christian believes Jesus is an incarnation of God and is therefore God. Satan, by standard beliefs, was created by God and fell from his grace. If Satan were supreme he would have told God to go stuff it and tossed God out of Heaven.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Gotcha.

But, aren't we all incarnations of God?

Personally, I believe all religious icons were incarnations of the true Creator. From Vishnu to the Great White Buffalo, from Jesus to the homeless guy with the intriguing cardboard signs. But that is just me of course. Anyone helping to spread God's grace and true word is an incarnation of God's will, and was put here as a guidepost for the rest of us to learn from and come closer to God ourselves. That means, sometimes we are the incarnations of God as well....... if we're lucky.

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by Kyobosha

 

Ok I'll narrow it down. You were not wrong about the general structure of freemasonry. Please allow me take that one back.

In my personal experience, though, I have still yet to meet a Satan worshipping Mason. I won't be the guy that says they don't exist...... But I will be the guy to say they have to be pretty rare. Brotherly love, relief, and truth doesn't exactly sound like a satanic creed so I'm unsure as to why a satanist would become a mason.

Another thing that you weren't entirely wrong about, but also was not entirely correct was there being a difference between the 3 degrees, known as blue lodge masonry, and the Appendant rites. Yes it is possible to join other Masonic bodies after being raised to a Master Mason. What does NOT change however is your standing amongst the brethren. Because a man has a title like 32 degree or a Knights Templar degree, or is a member of the shrine, does not make that man a "higher level" mason. Once a brother reaches the 3rd, he is considered an equal amongs the brethren. I would say the only small exceptions to this would be becoming an officer in the lodge, and eventually becoming a Worshipful Master. The title of Past Master is highly, highly respected.

The only other exception I would say is the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite which you have to be a 33 degree mason to be allowed attendance. The 33 degree in masonry is not a 'petitioned' degree. It's and honorary, highly prestigious Masonic title that can only be gifted to a member of the Scottish rite for his labors as a mason. And to be honest, I have only met one 33 degree mason that seemed to have an inflated ego about his title. I've met several, and they were all very humble and down to earth.... 'cept one. But that's not a story for Ats

edit on 18-2-2012 by W3RLIED2 because: Sp

To clarify, by satanic, satanism, satanists, I am referring to the 'theistic satanism' not the leveyan satanism or social view of satanism. Those in theistic satanism see Satan (the devil, or lucifer) as a deity and typically focus on devotion. I believe your perception of a satanist (and correct me if this is not the image you have) is more based on societies image of a loner gothic type that stays in their basement. A theistic satanist on the outside will be just like anyone else.

I understand what you mean by the 32 degree or a Knights Templar degree not changing the status as viewed between bretheren of the third degree. I'm not saying that the higher degrees necessarily make one member greater than another but there is "knowledge" that is gained and associated with each degree. I would say with that does come respect.

Those gentlemen you mentioned sound like they are truly good guys, but the one I have to say I'm not surprised his ego seemed inflated, it would be hard to stay down to earth for me it takes a deliberate effort not to let a title get to your head

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Kyobosha

 

You are right that the Supreme Being one believes in could go by any name, including Satan. In that much you are absolutely correct. You are wrong that any Lodge or Grand Lodge could ever endorse a Satanic Ritual. Any "regular" Lodge of Freemasonry has specific Opening and Closing procedures and Degree Work, and Lectures, and a few things like Lodges of Sorrow and Funeral Rites that are occasionally done. All of that work is specifically non-denominational. We do say prayers and refer to a Holy Book, but the prayers don't call God by any specific name like "God, Allah, Satan, or Jehovah." They Holy Book is often the Bible where I live, but in other areas they may add additional books to the altar or change the book with whatever is appropriate for their Lodge, but they still do NOT change the so-called "rituals."

Also, I don't know how to say this any more clearly, but if there were a secret subset of people vying to influence the world, or do some crime, or create a shadow govt, they would be an extreme fringe, and an extremely small subset, and if they were ever found out they would be removed from the fraternity, so in fact, they would not represent Masonry in any way. You cannot define a large group by the actions of a select few acting against the wishes of the larger group. If a small subset of Math Professors devised a bank robbery scheme and robbed a bank, it would be illogical to call all math teachers bank robbers. Same concept. Even if one of these conspiracies panned out and had some truth to it, the perpetrators would be kicked out of the fraternity, and it would have no bearing on the whole of Masonry anyway.

I agree 100% with your Math teacher analogy . I have admitted that not all freemasons are trying to take over the world and worship Satan. There are masons that are honestly good people.

But the fact that services are non denominational and do not call out the supreme being by name makes it very possible that the deity for a lodge is Satan or lucifer. Again, I'm not referring to leveyan satanism but theistic satanism. Theistic satanists absolutely appear normal and like good people on the outside. And who know what rituals irregular lodges have. I think it is actually possible for a lodge, grand lodge, or appendant body to endorse a theistic satanism or luciferian doctrine.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by Kyobosha

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by Conspirus
With a human being there’s an enormous amount of energy released.” Bill Schnoebelen

Well there's a trustworthy source!

As soon as Bill's name came up, the die was cast on the 'quality' of your posts.

Fitz

If you are specifically referring to the energy portion of the post, there are many other sources (mainstream as well) that believe in this energy concept. Either way, many other sources have been thrown out there other than Bill. This one source says nothing about the quality of the other posts.

However, if the quality of these other 'sources' have been as diligent investigated as the investigation has been with Bill Schnoebelen, then these other 'sources' are as worthless. Given Schnoebelen's past of claiming to be many controversial things in a relatively short span of time (some of them diametrically opposed to each other at the same time), does it not cross your mind that maybe just maybe he's a religious carny preaching whatever the choir wants to hear?

If Schnoebelen claimed the sun was shining, I'd doublecheck that

Fitz

And what if the other sources don't use Bill in their research? Even if you don't like Bill you can't negate the other sources automatically and say every post is gibberish. I'm just trying to make sure posts are ignored because they are automatically labelled as such.

Originally posted by Fitzgibbon

Originally posted by W3RLIED2
reply to post by Kyobosha

 

Ok I'll narrow it down. You were not wrong about the general structure of freemasonry. Please allow me take that one back.

In my personal experience, though, I have still yet to meet a Satan worshipping Mason. I won't be the guy that says they don't exist...... But I will be the guy to say they have to be pretty rare. Brotherly love, relief, and truth doesn't exactly sound like a satanic creed so I'm unsure as to why a satanist would become a mason.

Plus a Mason prays and gives homage to the beneficent all-powerful Creator of all that is, whose Divine Will has been expressed through the VSL. I'm not seeing that washing if one were a Satanist.

Mind you, I could be wrong about Satanism. I've been wrong about many things before.

Fitz

I don't think you would obviously know someone is a theistic satanist or luciferian. A satanist doesn't have to have the persona and a appearance that is perceived by our society.

Originally posted by Kyobosha
I understand what you mean by the 32 degree or a Knights Templar degree not changing the status as viewed between bretheren of the third degree. I'm not saying that the higher degrees necessarily make one member greater than another but there is "knowledge" that is gained and associated with each degree. I would say with that does come respect.

There is no additional 'knowledge' derived from the Scottish Rite Degrees. They are a series of morality plays enacted that expand upon the same basic premises in the Blue Lodge Degrees. Additonally, one does not need to view all of them to receive the 32nd Degree. Hell, I actually know someone who did not see any of them and is a 32nd Degree Mason.