Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

page: 15
38
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatOwl
Then why do Freemasons proclaim their oaths are just "symbolic", and a remnant of the past ?


The penalties are symbolic, the obligations of it are not.

Additionally, what do all your posts have to do with the Original Topic?



edit on 18-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatOwl

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by GreatOwl
But, oaths were very serious matters, not to be taken lightly. You wouldn't swear an oath to have tongue cut out, heart ripped from chest, and be disemboweled, unless you really meant it.


What other reason is there to "swear an oath" unless you mean it? Unless you lack integrity, then I suppose things like that might bother you.


Then why do Freemasons proclaim their oaths are just "symbolic", and a remnant of the past ?


If you ever get the chance, and you are interested enough to find out, read our ritual as the answer is in black and white. Pay particular attention to the entire penalty. It's easy enough even I understand it.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreatOwl

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by partycrasher
per masonic humiliating ritual: for a man to be blindfolded, bound, partially unclothed etc after being told only "freemen" can join is humiliating and i am just explaining this one circumstance.


Yes, and if that is all the farther you have thought about it, it may well seem humiliating. But lucky for us, we are smart enough to explain the symbolism involved in the ritual. And while from the uneducated, it may seem unnecessary, as a mason, I can assure you it's very necessary.


In other words, without Freemasons "telling you" what it is you are going to see, the newly entered candidate would have no clue how to interpret the events for himself.

He is "prepared psychologically", so that he can "correctly" interpret his experiences, according to the manner in which Freemason's interpret them.

This is necessary, because there are "other ways" to interpret the very same experiences. And Freemasons need to make sure the candidate thinks only of the masonic interpretation.

This then indicates that the candidate is not being introduced to "truth", which would be self-evident from the direct experience itself, but is being fed a "false interpretation" of what he is about to experience in the masonic lodge.

When a baby is born into the world, no one "preps" him in advance, on what he is about to see. He comes into the new experience raw and fresh, and he develops an understanding of the world simply through his own direct contact with nature.

To have to prepare an individual for a new experience, suggests that the individual is being intentionally misled instead, through subtle cues and symbols, that would suggest to his mind an interpretation that would make the experience "acceptable" to him.





I normally wouldn't quote something this large if not to break it up, but you have explained the reason and the answer yourself without knowing it.

The initiate should come into freemasonry knowing very little about what he is about to encounter. He is told repeatedly that he has nothing to fear and a friend will always be there to guide him.

A new born baby comes into the world the same way. Only he/she hopes and prays that they will always have a trusted friend there to guide them. As we all know, life isn't that way and we sometimes have to wing it and hope everything works out OK.


In masonry, once you have been taught the basics of our symbolism and signs, it's up to the individual to search for further light, or further knowledge on each topic, should they chose to do so. Just like in life. Most folks don't have mommie and daddy to lean on forever. You have to learn how to make it on your own, through preparation and training.

I can't tell if you are getting tired of arguing, or you are starting to understand.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   
I would have to say that a newborn baby is under the influence of his parents and what they believe to be truth first. As they grow older and start to "see" the world themselves is when the real learning comes in.

Also I find it very odd that people will fight and kill each other over words written by MAN many many moons ago.

Man is fallible, any chance some of those writings are not fully correct? If you can agree that some are not correct then we have to assume more might not be correct as well.

So we have pages and pages of bickering, with proof being presented that was either verbally passed down or recorded and translated. Add in a bit of embellishment here and a white lie there and voila!

Simple question for everybody - How far away is the Sun from Earth? And you know that to be the truth because?
edit on 18-9-2012 by BrianG because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I am here not to convince the extremists and the fanatics, but those who are rational.

Call me what you will, but your opinion does not stand up to reality.



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
I found this very interesting:


The Orders of the Masonic Knights Templar are a part of a progression from the first three degrees of Freemasonry. Membership thus involves several prerequisites:

You must have received the Supreme Degree of the Holy Royal Arch of Jerusalem, the final degree of Royal Arch Masonry, and be a member in good standing of a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons.


Membership ia a Royal Arch Chapter requires that you have been raised as a Master Mason in a Craft Lodge and be a member in good standing of a Masonic Craft Lodge.




Therefore, an applicant must be:

1. A Freemason in good standing with his Craft Lodge;

2. A Royal Arch Mason in good standing with his Chapter, and

3. A Christian, recommended by two members of the Order, who profess a belief in the "Christian Doctrine of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit".



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianG
 


What is the relevance of this post to the Original Post?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianG
 

That is a pretty accurate description, but I fail to see how it refers to the OP. Could you supply more clarification?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Well I kept reading crazy posts about masons NOT being Christian so I came across this as proof some MUST be Christian hence not devil worshipers



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by BrianG
 


In my Lodges, about half are Christian.
I even have a Christian Pastor in my Mother Lodge, and an army chaplain.

And of course, the half who aren't Christian don't believe in Satan, him being a Christian deity.



edit on 19/9/2012 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrianG
Well I kept reading crazy posts about masons NOT being Christian so I came across this as proof some MUST be Christian hence not devil worshipers


I see your point. The Original Post is about all Masons not worshipping Satan (Lucifer) not because they are Christian but because Satan is not a Supreme Being regardless of how you opt to view the myth surrounding him.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by BrianG
 

Okay. I see now where you were going with that.



posted on Sep, 19 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   


I am not going to apologize for not falling for the myth of Satan like other people have.

You are certainly entitled to believe all you deem fit. However, I would caution you that the demonic is very real and is quite evident in our rapidly disintegrating culture. When you see some of the strange degeneracy and lunacy happening in our culture, I wouldn't chalk it all up to humanity. There are much, much stronger spiritual forces at play.



So Rambam is not considered one of the great Jewish Scholars?

No, he is considered a Jewish Sage. He is well-revered in Chabad circles, but not in all of Orthodox Judaism. As I said before, he is quite a controversial figure - In fact, his books were banned because they diverged from the more mystical approach to theology and delved into more rationalist approaches. Yes - He's considered by some to be the greatest Sage - as in Chabad, but Rashi is considered by most to be his superior in theological thought.



Considering there is zero substantiating evidence for angels I would tend to think it is more than just my opinion.


There is evidence of angels in the Bible. Heck, even in the King James Masonic Bible there are angels.



I already threw most of it out a long time before I became a Mason. I decided my life was not going to revolve around unfounded religious guilt and dogma.

Strange, considering that Masonry centers around the building of Solomon's Temple - a very biblical account.



Forgive me if I do not believe in the ludicrousness of demon casting and other unproveable supernatural nonesense. The preposterousness of the premise is perpetrated by the pusillanimous to protect themselves from personal responsibility.

There is demonstrable proof. Just as any Vatican exorcist. Or read their books.



Considering I do not believe in either Satan or angels I would be really curious as to where I stated Satan was anything at all. Considering I made it clear earlier that good and evil are part of God I think you are quite mistaken.

The story goes that Satan's greatest invention and trick was to convince humanity that he doesn't exist. I guess he was successful in your case.



Because he was asked to do so by our little CookieMonster, who considers the Talmud more important than the actual Torah

Never gave precedence to one over the other. Nice try.



By the time 100 CE rolled around (and I'm being generous by about a century here) the game of Chinese whispers was long over, and hence we are left with the remnants of that game. Let's try and stick with the original material (Torah) for the purposes of your discussion with me, OK?

The oral tradition was passed down from Moses to the rabbis long before 100 CE. What exactly did you think Moses was doing for 40 days and nights up on a mountain? It was only when the Jews were threatened with decimation that it was determined that the oral tradition should be put into writing - hence, the Talmud.

The analogy used is that if you stick with the Torah only, you miss the whole lecture. The Torah is just the notes from the lecture. It's the difference between reading abbreviated Cliff Notes, or reading the actual text itself.

And, there are plenty of examples. The Torah gives many instructions and many varied rules. The oral tradition examines these carefully, and gives further explanation and commentary. Example: How do you bind tefillin? You are commanded to do so in the Torah, but the Torah doesn't tell you how. How do you keep the Sabbath? The Torah doesn't go into too much detail, so what are the rules and guidelines? What constitutes "work" on the Sabbath? It is only through the oral tradition that these answers are codified and explained.

So, no, I won't just "stick with the Torah", because it is the long-standing Jewish tradition that there are 2 laws - the written, and the oral law.



Let's also try and drop the emotional reaction you are hiding behind a wall of very thin sarcasm?

No emotions. You and your cohort raise a hissy fit when confronted with facts, then cry wolf. It's quite comical.



Now, I didn't ask you for the orthodox interpretation of the word Israel. I asked you, quite clearly, to tell me what those morphemes actualy translate to, given the context of the story. Indulge me, and answer?


I have already given you my answer in an earlier post. Re-read it, and comment on it as much as you like.
edit on 19-9-2012 by CookieMonster09 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by CookieMonster09
You are certainly entitled to believe all you deem fit. However, I would caution you that the demonic is very real and is quite evident in our rapidly disintegrating culture. When you see some of the strange degeneracy and lunacy happening in our culture, I wouldn't chalk it all up to humanity. There are much, much stronger spiritual forces at play.


This pathetic cop out ('the Devil made me do it'. 'he/she was possssed') completely undermines free will. We have the ability to choose for ourselves, when we start ascribing our actions to some mythical monesense then we really do have strange degeneracy lunacy happaening in our culture.


No, he is considered a Jewish Sage. He is well-revered in Chabad circles, but not in all of Orthodox Judaism. As I said before, he is quite a controversial figure - In fact, his books were banned because they diverged from the more mystical approach to theology and delved into more rationalist approaches. Yes - He's considered by some to be the greatest Sage - as in Chabad, but Rashi is considered by most to be his superior in theological thought.


You asked for a Jewish Sage, I gave you a Jewish Sage. It is not my problem that you do not happen to agree with the one I quoted. You outlined parameters, I fulfilled them.

As for the Orthodox I fulfilled your requests there as well.


There is evidence of angels in the Bible. Heck, even in the King James Masonic Bible there are angels.


'Evidence' in the Bible? Really? The Bible is not a history book, nor is it a footnoted compilation of observable phenomenom. It is an anecdotal collection of moral and philosophical lessons. When people start taking the entire thing literally is where we run into issues of intellectual bankruptcy.


Strange, considering that Masonry centers around the building of Solomon's Temple - a very biblical account.


It is an allegorical lesson, not a literal one, this is quite obvious in the Degrees.


There is demonstrable proof. Just as any Vatican exorcist. Or read their books.


Just because some nudnik writes a book the he exercised demons does not make it true.


The story goes that Satan's greatest invention and trick was to convince humanity that he doesn't exist. I guess he was successful in your case.


Thank God he was then because I am unburdened by the ludicrous belief in a half-assed fallen angel that somehow has partial or full control over my actions. I have free will. What do you have besides fear of the Devil?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by CookieMonster09

The story goes that Satan's greatest invention and trick was to convince humanity that he doesn't exist. I guess he was successful in your case.



Assume that there are many demons. You are quite unaware of the existence of most of them - you don't know their names or even that they exist.

If each of the other demons made you unaware of there existence, and satan has failed to do so, he must necessarily be weaker or less powerful that all the other demons of which you do not know, that have actually succeeded in keeping their existence a secret.

edit on 20/9/2012 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by BrianG
Well I kept reading crazy posts about masons NOT being Christian so I came across this as proof some MUST be Christian hence not devil worshipers


I see your point. The Original Post is about all Masons not worshipping Satan (Lucifer) not because they are Christian but because Satan is not a Supreme Being regardless of how you opt to view the myth surrounding him.

You are right, Augustus, and that seems to be a common theme for any self styled Christian do gooder who comes to ATS with a "message." Any Faith, Religion, Group, Sect, Membership, or Society not of [them] are automatically Satan worshippers. Some will even proclaim to you that either you worship Jesus or you worship Satan, that those are the only choices one has. I say this:
Satan is a Christian invention, along with Lucifer, and Demons. Christianity invented these enemies, and they are more than welcome to them. I, and I am sure I am not alone here, just wish they would stop telling the rest of us who we follow, who we worship, and who we are alignment and in allegiance with. Like the OP. Not a Mason, obviously, and yet claims to know what goes on within the Lodge. And the same for other religions too, Christians do not research and study these things, they are forbidden to seek secular or Occult knowledge, but they do seem to assume a lot of things. Again, I blame the organization running Christianity, and the hidden hands behind them. There is a sinister purpose here, and an agenda, and I am all about exposing this to everyone, should I ever truly discover exactly who, and what this "Jesus" is, for I know it is not the wise teacher and sage that came to teach, and then was taken home by his people.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
I see your point. The Original Post is about all Masons not worshipping Satan (Lucifer) not because they are Christian but because Satan is not a Supreme Being regardless of how you opt to view the myth surrounding him.

-Also a response to BrianG

Perhaps not Satan, but rather Lucifer, or his positive side Adonay;

Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma


Lucifer the light bearer, strange name to give the son of darkness . . . Lucifer, the son of the morning! . . . Is it he who bears the light, doubt it not! (pg. 321)

For the Initiates, this [Satan] is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, which which may serve for evil, It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will . . . They represent this Force which presides over the physical generation, under the mythological and horned form of the God PAN; . . . thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend. (pg 200)

The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us Initiates of the high degree, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine: If Lucifer where not God, would Adonay (sic) whose deeds prove his cruelty, perfidy, and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests culminate him? . . .

. . . Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary for light to serve as its foil as the pedestal is necessary to the state . . .

Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil. (pg 217)


So when you asked earlier about what Capricorn had to do with anything, now you know who Pan is and what planet rules its constellation. You also have its connection to Babylon which is fitting for those who call you devil worshipers as the Whore of Babylon is one who helps bring in the reign of the anti-christ of Christian belief.

May I remind you Masons that Solomon, whose knowledge you claim to possess (no pun intended), had the knowledge of controlling demons with which he used to build his great temple.

So more light anyone?
edit on 20-9-2012 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli


May I remind you Masons that Solomon, whose knowledge you claim to possess (no pun intended), had the knowledge of controlling demons with which he used to build his great temple.



I stopped believing in demons when I was 12.

Do you believe that demons built the Taj Mahal as well?



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Is it true that Freemasons believe they can or are GOD(s) of EA*RTH anyone's answer would be appreciated
thanks.

NAMASTE*******



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 




And, there are plenty of examples. The Torah gives many instructions and many varied rules. The oral tradition examines these carefully, and gives further explanation and commentary. Example: How do you bind tefillin? You are commanded to do so in the Torah, but the Torah doesn't tell you how. How do you keep the Sabbath? The Torah doesn't go into too much detail, so what are the rules and guidelines? What constitutes "work" on the Sabbath? It is only through the oral tradition that these answers are codified and explained.

So, no, I won't just "stick with the Torah", because it is the long-standing Jewish tradition that there are 2 laws - the written, and the oral law.


Maybe you're not reading your Torah properly? Both Exodus and Deuteronomy make the purpose of the Sabbath quite clear (the only one named in the actual Commandments): Observe and remember. Try Deuteronomy 5:12 and 5:15, and Exodus 20:8 and 20:11, and especially 31:11-15. The key is in understanding the word melachah. This is how to understand what constitutes work on the Sabbath. No need to look outside the Torah.

The Torah also expressly tells you where to bind your tefillin. You will find everything you need in there, again in Exodus (13:9 for example) and in Deuteronomy (11:18 for example). Any ritualistic complication of this act is only man-made, hence Talmudic.

So, if you stick with the textbook you get all your answers. You just have to learn how to read it first.

Now, could you at least link me to your prior post on the morphemes? It's a simple question, and if you can't answer it twice, at least save me the trouble of having to search out your answer within your other posts.





new topics
top topics
 
38
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join