posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 06:50 PM
reply to post by KSigMason
Ksig, you are playing word games with me.
I specifically mentioned ulterior interests in regards to harm, you did not include that into your clarification of what you consider harm.
Also you did not honestly answer my question for what is the converse of your statement about the 3rd degree, in the same exact context as you wrote
it. The important part you left out is the end part, that a mason MAY lose his life for sticking to their integrity and honor. Well, if there is a
reason why losing your life, in the same context of the 3rd degree as you originally wrote it, is something positive you want and strive for, to be
denied the chance or opportunity you want would be harmful to your interests. For all I know, Freemasonry teaches we are stuck in an endless loop of
mortality and a perfect Mason learns to die so that he can become immortal and/or goto the grand lodge in the sky... I don't know, you won't tell me
the straight up truth, you are not allowed to tell me the straight up truth. I'm just searching for truth it's not easy, which is fine by me as long
as it's not impossible to find truth.
The rest of your post is claiming I am disagreeing to your straightforward answers, that I am manipulating and twisting Freemasonry to squeeze out
some salvation. That is the opposite of the truth. I am asking straightforward questions and you are disagreeing with the implications and twisting my
straightforward definitions so Freemasonry does not fit.
If we do not agree to use the same definition of salvation, including the definitions of the key words in that definition like harm, we are not in
agreement we are talking about the same thing when we have a conversation using the word salvation or harm. And you know this to be true, you are
clearly using it as a deliberate tactic to answer my questions without lying or admitting certain things which you are obligated not to admit.
edit on 23-8-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)