Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

page: 29
39
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


You feel it's explicitly implied that Supreme Being means monotheism? Well, the standard definition of Supreme Being makes no implications whatsoever that Supreme Being means belief in one and only one God.

So if you are making the choice to leave it implied you are not using the standard definition of Supreme Being, and you make the choice to not ask how the candidate interprets the question, you make the choice to be completely ignorant of whether or not they are in fact a genuine monotheist.

It seems crystal clear that in practice, the requirement is simply a belief in God and explicitly not a belief in one and only one God.

You have completely failed to demonstrate that it's a binding and enforced rule in regular Freemasonry that you believe in the existence of one and only one God. Linking quotes of landmarks and interpretations of landmarks does NOTHING to prove the landmark is binding and enforced.

Do you understand the distinction between an enforced rule and an unenforced rule? Do you understand that despite your personal interpretation, the generally accepted definition of Supreme Being simply means God, and it explicitly does not mean monotheism?




posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   
This question is for anyone to answer:

Monotheism, by definition, is the belief in the EXISTENCE of ONE and ONLY one God.

If you believe there is a single Supreme God who created all of existence, and you believe in the existence of lesser Gods who are nothing more than a manifestation of the Supreme God who created all of existence, are you a polytheist or monotheist?
edit on 14-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 09:16 PM
link   

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.



edit on 14-10-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Linking quotes of landmarks and interpretations of landmarks does NOTHING to prove the landmark is binding and enforced.


Did you bother to view the websites you opted to ingore with the post I am now addressing? You would have found that these came from the 'requirements' section of each Grand Lodge. You know, 'mandatory' aspects of joining.


Do you understand the distinction between an enforced rule and an unenforced rule? Do you understand that despite your personal interpretation, the generally accepted definition of Supreme Being simply means God, and it explicitly does not mean monotheism?


How is the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts, Georgia and Alabama's viewpoints and requirements my 'personal interpretation'? Considering they explicitly said 'monotheism' I think you may want to address that directly, there was no room for your obviously incorrect interpretation of what Masonry requires.

Belief in a Supreme Being means ONE God. Is this clear yet?



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   

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.



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Linking quotes of landmarks and interpretations of landmarks does NOTHING to prove the landmark is binding and enforced.


Did you bother to view the websites you opted to ingore with the post I am now addressing? You would have found that these came from the 'requirements' section of each Grand Lodge. You know, 'mandatory' aspects of joining.


Do you understand the distinction between an enforced rule and an unenforced rule? Do you understand that despite your personal interpretation, the generally accepted definition of Supreme Being simply means God, and it explicitly does not mean monotheism?


How is the Grand Lodges of Massachusetts, Georgia and Alabama's viewpoints and requirements my 'personal interpretation'? Considering they explicitly said 'monotheism' I think you may want to address that directly, there was no room for your obviously incorrect interpretation of what Masonry requires.

Belief in a Supreme Being means ONE God. Is this clear yet?



Show me at least a minimal amount of evidence demonstrating monotheism is an actively enforced rule within regular Freemasonry... you haven't even presented a logical argument that supports your claims.

(Just to remove ways for you to dodge and deflect, enforced rules means there are effective measures taken which ensure compliance of the rules. Unenforced rules mean there is a lack of effective measures taken to ensure compliance. )

Belief in A Supreme Being means belief in at least 1 God. (Could be any type of theism)
Belief in ONLY 1 God means belief in only 1 God. (Can only be monotheism)
Is this clear yet?



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
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?


It would appear that the trolling is strictly in your posts as the third paragraph is where the Brother in questions aquiesces and admits that the Landmarks and Constitution are binding.


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!


The first two paragraphs also make it clear he does not put stock in the Landmarks , which as has been demonstrated, are binding rules. I find it odd that you opt to take the opinion of one Mason who was admittedly unware that 'the possibility that the Grand Constitutions might be more restrictive never even occurred to me'. Being that he is not aware of the specifics of his jurisdiction does not exaclt help oyur cause.


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.


He is also talking about being unware of the restrictions which he then recongnizes as being binding and restrictive.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Show me at least a minimal amount of evidence demonstrating monotheism is an actively enforced rule within regular Freemasonry... you haven't even presented a logical argument that supports your claims.

...

Belief in A Supreme Being means belief in at least 1 God. (Could be any type of theism)
Belief in ONLY 1 God means belief in only 1 God. (Can only be monotheism)
Is this clear yet?


Why do you continue to ignore the requirements that monotheism is the basis of Masonic belief as thoroughly explained by several Grand Lodge websites? How much more logic is required when the requirements state you must be monotheistic? You have it spelled out in black and white.

Read below regarding Masonic crimes:


Heresy, for instance is not a Masonic crime. Masons are obliged to use the words of the Old Charges, "to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinion to themselves;" and, therefore, as long as a Mason acknowledges his belief in the existence of one God, a lodge can take no action on his particular opinions, however hetrodox they may be. Source


Notice the point about 'one God'? As long as the Brother professes faith in one God he is in adherence to the Landmarks and Constitution. If his faith changes to something other then Monotheism then he is violation of Masonic law and will be expelled. Do you need more Masons to explain this to you?

What does the Grand Lodge of New Hampshire sya on the matter? See below:


Freemasonry accepts applications from men who are of good character, recommended by those within the fraternity, and who believe in one God. With the exception that one must be monotheistic, Freemasonry makes no distinction among the various religions when considering a man for membership, nor does it care about his political beliefs, wealth, or station in life.


Monotheism in Masonry seems to be a theme that you blithely ignore.




edit on 15-10-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer (except when I get him some)



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
nevermind.
edit on 15-10-2012 by network dude because: waste of bandwidth. wall is still there.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Augustus, do you have any evidence whatsoever that monotheism is an ENFORCED RULE?

I have no interest is unenforced rules so show me any proof monotheism is an enforced rule. Failure to do so will result in you creating the appearance you literally have no proof monotheism is an enforced rule.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Augustus, do you have any evidence whatsoever that monotheism is an ENFORCED RULE?


What else besides links to specific Grand Lodge requirements and Masonic jurisprudence constitutes 'evidence' in your opinion?

The links that I provided make it quite clear that a change in ones beliefs away from what is proscribed is grounds for immediate expulsion as this violates the constituion of the respective Grand Lodge. The Landmarks and Constitution are rules and if the rules are broken their are repercussions.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Augustus, do you have any evidence whatsoever that monotheism is an ENFORCED RULE?


What else besides links to specific Grand Lodge requirements and Masonic jurisprudence constitutes 'evidence' in your opinion?

The links that I provided make it quite clear that a change in ones beliefs away from what is proscribed is grounds for immediate expulsion as this violates the constituion of the respective Grand Lodge. The Landmarks and Constitution are rules and if the rules are broken their are repercussions.

Just a couple of quick and easy questions to make sure you and I are on the same page...

Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?

Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Just a couple of quick and easy questions to make sure you and I are on the same page...

Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?


See below:


In the 1950s the Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America upheld three "ancient Landmarks":

1.Monotheism — An unalterable and continuing belief in God.
2.The Volume of The Sacred Law — an essential part of the furniture of the Lodge.
3.Prohibition of the discussion of Religion and Politics (within the lodge).

Masonic Landmarks, by Bro. Michael A. Botelho.



Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?


Being that this was adopted by the conference of Grand Masters for North America what do you think is the answer?




edit on 15-10-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


I will only accept your direct answer in your own words for both questions... I only asked 2 questions, both of which are simple yes or no questions.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?


No, there are variations in Constitutions, Landmarks (with the three I listed above being the exception), by-laws, rules, policies or practices.

For example, some jurisdicitons allow men that are between the ages of 18 to 21 while most adhere to 21. Others have variations to certain rules or by-laws that may not even be present in other jurisdictions. An example of this would be the method of communicating ritual, some jursidictions use a cipher while others are mouth-to-ear.

However, what I posted about the conference of Grand Masters in regards the three universally adopted Landmarks is used to determine mutual recognition and amity, not only with United States Grand Lodges but other lodges outside of the country.


Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?


As it is a universal Landmark it is enforceable, that is the purpose of the Landmarks.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Erbal
 


Erbal AM is essentially a masonic dogmatist and if something is not in the official (IE authorized by a Grand Lodge approved by himself) documentation (err dictation) he will not accept it. Masonry is constructed such that one largely assigns meanings themselves on top of the basic structure which is provided in literature.

You are NOT going to find conclusive proof in his eyes of Lucifer worship.

Operative masonry is highly philosophical which by its nature is malleable and thus allows people differing perceptions of the 'teachings'.

Of course this guy has blinders on and an obvious agenda so I don't know why you bother arguing with him when it is clear he is entrenched in his position and will not waver.

I get kicks out of reading his denial of everything. A while back I argued with him over the importance of astrology in masonry and his conclusion was that the use of astrological symbols does not constitute any importance of astrology regardless of what masons such as Barlow or David Ovason have detailed or even the symbolism of the royal arch degrees (the arch consisting of the zodiacal signs of the Sun's procession). He even disregards the art work of highly astrological esoteric nature done by masons as their own interpretation of the 'teachings'.

Again it is an exercise in pseudo-philosophy which is an subject largely based on opinions and unless rules are established will go in circles endlessly (like this thread).

If you believe reverence for and teachings largely based around the Sun is Lucifer worship then that is all you need to conclude that they (masons) worship the sun. No need to argue with them about it.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


I'm explicitly not trying to prove Masons are worshiping Lucifer.

This thread started with the OP making an ambiguous claim based on questionable premises. I am always skeptical when people fail to give a good explanation for their claims. The OP's efforts came off as a disingenuous attempt to quash the Mason-Lucifer controversy once and for all.

So I've been challenging the OP's claims (OP is claiming it's not possible for a real Mason to believe in the existence of Lucifer because a real Mason is a monotheist) and so far I've been battling through constant doublespeak and deflections.

I feel like Augustus is either intentionally playing games or he doesn't know how to give a good explanation... either way, by the time I'm done with this subject, I'll know for myself how much truth there is in the OP's claims.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
what they bow to is secrecy.

keeping crap from other people. period.

I'm not concerned with what the spiritual name for that is these days but I know the spirit and do not see eye to eye with that spirit. At all.



posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Does every regular Grand Lodge, and every regular Masonic jurisdiction, set and adopt the same exact constitution, landmarks, by-laws, rules, policies, and practices?


No, there are variations in Constitutions, Landmarks (with the three I listed above being the exception), by-laws, rules, policies or practices.

For example, some jurisdicitons allow men that are between the ages of 18 to 21 while most adhere to 21. Others have variations to certain rules or by-laws that may not even be present in other jurisdictions. An example of this would be the method of communicating ritual, some jursidictions use a cipher while others are mouth-to-ear.

However, what I posted about the conference of Grand Masters in regards the three universally adopted Landmarks is used to determine mutual recognition and amity, not only with United States Grand Lodges but other lodges outside of the country.


Are you claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions enforce monotheism as a requirement into regular Freemasonry?


As it is a universal Landmark it is enforceable, that is the purpose of the Landmarks.


Enforceable is in theory, enforced is in practice.

I want to know if you are claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions are actively and effectively enforcing monotheism, and not theism in general, as an unflinching requirement for regular Masonry?

PS: Is there any particular reason you waited 29 pages before once mentioning a conference of Grand Masters and 3 universally adopted landmarks?



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
I want to know if you are claiming or implying ALL regular Masonic jurisdictions are actively and effectively enforcing monotheism, and not theism in general, as an unflinching requirement for regular Masonry?


As I am neither in personal communication nor have traveled to every Masons jurisdiction so I can not in good faith answer such a question. The Landmark, regardless, is still quite clear.


PS: Is there any particular reason you waited 29 pages before once mentioning a conference of Grand Masters and 3 universally adopted landmarks?


The issue of Masonic belief requirements had not been dissected to the point at which it presently has until you particpated in this thread.





new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join