Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan), page 29

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
How can your quote be reasonably considered as evidence the landmark regarding monotheism is a binding and enforced rule throughout regular Freemasonry?

That, coupled with the Grand Lodge websites stating this is the case makes the answer rather obvious.

Here is a contradictory interpretation to the one you provided, and it's made by a Mason on the Ask A Freemason forum. www.masonforum.com...

Contradicts? Really?

I hope you don’t feel as though I’m arguing with you, Brother Collin…if that’s what the Grand Constitutions say, then that’s what they say. But the application candidates fill out to confirm they meet the requirements of being a Freemason says “Supreme Being,” and the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me.

Seems the Brother you cited concurs that the Grand Constitutions are correct and enforceable.

I’ll take your word for it that the Grand Constitutions say that. But since the application candidates fill out merely requires an expressed belief in a “Supreme Being,” I feel comfortable stating that’s all that’s required…because it’s not really a “requirement” if you’re not making any effort to enforce it. I would never assume it means anything more than exactly what it says, because it’s ridiculous to leave it open for interpretation instead of just clearly stating what we want.

I don’t put any stock in the preamble about the “Landmarks,” since there’s no clear consensus on what the “Ancient Landmarks” of Freemasonry really are…or if they even exist at all.

I hope you don’t feel as though I’m arguing with you, Brother Collin…if that’s what the Grand Constitutions say, then that’s what they say. But the application candidates fill out to confirm they meet the requirements of being a Freemason says “Supreme Being,” and the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me.

Why are you playing BS games?

It's a short, 3 paragraph post and you blatantly ignored the first 2 paragraphs in a futile attempt to take the 3rd paragraph out of context. Did you think no one would notice or have you digressed into full blown trolling?

The first 2 paragraphs make it crystal clear he feels comfortable in saying an expressed belief in God is the true requirement, not monotheism. He makes it clear he feels monotheism is not a real requirement because there is no effort to enforce it! He makes he clear he would never assume something means more than what it says and it's ridiculous to leave "Supreme Being" open to interpretation instead of clearly stating they want monotheists and not theists!

And you clearly have some selective reading issue going on if you think the third paragraph makes any implications about the enforcement of rules... he's obviously talking about the WORDING on the application and how it never occurred to him they should use more restrictive wording on the application because this entire time he has been under the impression Supreme Being simply means God and the God requirement is a reflection of the standard definition.