It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

page: 33
52
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
For the record: have you changed your position from "ALL regular Masonic lodges are required to be monotheistic" to "ALL regular Masonic Lodges in the US are required to be monotheistic" ???


Again, since we are on a forum in the United States when I refer to Masonry I am refering to Masonry in the United States which accounts for the largest bloc of membership.


You have not even attempted to demonstrate that every US Grand Lodge has those 3 ancient landmarks. Why can't you be bothered to show some proof instead of asserting it as fact?


The fact that there is mutual amity and recognition between the 51 Grand Lodges of the United States shows that the 3 Landmarks are being adhered to completely.


The whole subject of landmarks is a controversy. Even the 25 Mackey landmarks do not mention monotheism.


The Conference of Grand Masters codified this long after Mackey, it is now Masonic 'policy' for lack of a better word.


No mention of monotheism, just a belief in God.


What does the the book they published in 1956, Grand Lodge Recognition: A Symposium on the Conditions of Grand Lodge Recognition say?


Augustus: you are the king of BS mountain. I've easily debunked all of your major claims so far.


Really? Here is my email correspondence with a member of the conference:


Most Worshipful X,

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. The reason I approached the Conference for clarification was a portion of an article published at bessel.org where I often go for Masonic jurisprudence and rule clarification:

III. Ancient Landmarks
That it subscribes fundamentally, ritualistically and in all its relations to the Ancient Landmarks, Customs and Usages of the Craft. This requires adherence to the following.
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.

One of the prospective candidates asked for further clarification on the defintion of belief in a Supreme Being. Is this strictly a monotheistic definition or is there room for a more liberal interpretation? If so, can you clarify.

Thank you,
(me)

response:

Dear Brother X,

You are correct.

The statement however in the landmark is " Belief in a Supreme Being (or Diety)". Being (Diety) is singular not plural, which may give further insight.

X


Pay attention to the bolded parts and the fact that he capitalizes Deity (dispite his mis-spelling). Is that clear enough or do you want to continue to insult me?




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
You knew exactly what I meant so stop acting like you did not.
BS. I knew only what you wrote and what you wrote is not consistent with what you are now claiming was your intended message.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
How so when the requirement for membership is known prior to joining?
An ambiguous and subjective requirement is known prior to joining. Feel free to present a photo or scan of the information given to potential candidates that explains clearly what the God requirement is... I would not be surprised at all if the word monotheism is not used once.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
It is there because if your belief changes (your belief in a Supreme Being ceases) you are no longer in complaince with the Landmark. I have seen members leave because of this, there is even one who posts here occasionally who has left for this very reason.
What the hell are you talking about? If it's a requirement your belief in God must be unalterable, that means if you join without a specific belief in the GOATU and then switch to a specific belief in GOATU, you violated the god requirement by altering your belief in God.

But again, if it's a rule that only an individual can enforce on themselves out of their own free will, and they really have no way of getting caught, that rule is reduced to a suggestion and not an effectively enforced rule.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicusI would think so. The reverse would be a rather paradoxal situation where God keeps creating more Gods.
You assume so, but you do not know? Why don't you check and make sure? And I don't understand why a God creating another God is a paradox... you'll have to explain that one to me in plain English.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Only one way, capital 'd' as in synonomous with God.
The only definition of deity, in your reality, is that deity has a capital D and is synonymous with God? What about Greek and Egyptian mythologies, are those deities/gods or Deities/Gods?


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

The historical theology is what is being discussed. I try not to impart too much of my personal beliefs as they are not entirely relevant and I typically preface them by noting they are my personal beliefs.
I didn't imply I was asking about your personal beliefs (or any specific individual's personal beliefs), I was asking if we are discussing historical theology in general or personal beliefs in general.

Personal beliefs supersede historical theology because if no one personally believed in historical theology then historical theology would only exist on paper. If you believe everything in historical theology, it's still your personal belief because that is what you personally believe.

This discussion might have elements of historical theology but the discussion you and I have been engaged in is clearly about personal beliefs in general... we are talking about the God requirement to enter regular Freemasonry, that is entirely based on personal beliefs. You got stuck and tried to bait and switch with points regarding historical theology.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Because the historical Satan is not supreme as he was created by God.
So what? What part of worship means it can only be directed at a monotheistic God?


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

The Landmark was clear on the belief requirements.
Not beyond requiring theism, no, it was not clear at all.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
I knew only what you wrote and what you wrote is not consistent with what you are now claiming was your intended message.


I said, and I have been saying that there is nothing in Masonry for the non-monotheistic. You must believe in a Supreme Being, we mention and invoke God during meetings and degrees. The lessons and ritual are not intended nor would they be appreciated by someone who does not meet the belief requirement.


An ambiguous and subjective requirement is known prior to joining.


Do you join orginizations without asking questions? I have never had one candidate not ask for clarification on the requirements and the belief aspect is the one most frequently questioned.



Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
What the hell are you talking about? If it's a requirement your belief in God must be unalterable, that means if you join without a specific belief in the GOATU and then switch to a specific belief in GOATU, you violated the god requirement by altering your belief in God.


I am not refering to that. What I said, and it was quite clear, is that if you loose your faith in God, which does happen, then you are no longer in compliance. This is how I view the additional wording in the Landmark as I have seen this occur with persons in my lodge and elsewhere.


But again, if it's a rule that only an individual can enforce on themselves out of their own free will, and they really have no way of getting caught, that rule is reduced to a suggestion and not an effectively enforced rule.


It seems to work well enough as I said before there is nothing to be appreciated about Masonry for someone who does not meet the belief requirements in Masonry.


The only definition of deity, in your reality, is that deity has a capital D and is synonymous with God?


My reality? If you ask me for my opinion it is going to be my reality. If you do not want my opinion then do not ask it.


What about Greek and Egyptian mythologies, are those deities/gods or Deities/Gods?


Small 'd' and 'g'.


I didn't imply I was asking about your personal beliefs (or any specific individual's personal beliefs), I was asking if we are discussing historical theology in general or personal beliefs in general.

Personal beliefs supersede historical theology because if no one personally believed in historical theology then historical theology would only exist on paper. If you believe everything in historical theology, it's still your personal belief because that is what you personally believe.

This discussion might have elements of historical theology but the discussion you and I have been engaged in is clearly about personal beliefs in general... we are talking about the God requirement to enter regular Freemasonry, that is entirely based on personal beliefs. You got stuck and tried to bait and switch with points regarding historical theology.


A person's personal theology is based on historical theology unless they invented their own religion. If they believe in Satan it is, in almost all cases, based on the historical interpretation of Satan where he is the fallen angel.


So what? What part of worship means it can only be directed at a monotheistic God?


Monotheism requires it. I am still waiting for someone to explain how you can worship multiple gods and still be monotheistic.


Not beyond requiring theism, no, it was not clear at all.


If you say so. Try joining a lodge saying you believe in more than one deity and see how it works out. It may solve all of your questions.









edit on 28-10-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude monotheistically worships his sweet tea



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
You have not even attempted to demonstrate that every US Grand Lodge has those 3 ancient landmarks. Why can't you be bothered to show some proof instead of asserting it as fact?


The fact that there is mutual amity and recognition between the 51 Grand Lodges of the United States shows that the 3 Landmarks are being adhered to completely.


The whole subject of landmarks is a controversy. Even the 25 Mackey landmarks do not mention monotheism.


The Conference of Grand Masters codified this long after Mackey, it is now Masonic 'policy' for lack of a better word.


No mention of monotheism, just a belief in God.


What does the the book they published in 1956, Grand Lodge Recognition: A Symposium on the Conditions of Grand Lodge Recognition say?


Augustus: you are the king of BS mountain. I've easily debunked all of your major claims so far.


Really? Here is my email correspondence with a member of the conference:


Most Worshipful X,

Thank you for getting back to me so quickly. The reason I approached the Conference for clarification was a portion of an article published at bessel.org where I often go for Masonic jurisprudence and rule clarification:

III. Ancient Landmarks
That it subscribes fundamentally, ritualistically and in all its relations to the Ancient Landmarks, Customs and Usages of the Craft. This requires adherence to the following.
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.

One of the prospective candidates asked for further clarification on the defintion of belief in a Supreme Being. Is this strictly a monotheistic definition or is there room for a more liberal interpretation? If so, can you clarify.

Thank you,
(me)

response:

Dear Brother X,

You are correct.

The statement however in the landmark is " Belief in a Supreme Being (or Diety)". Being (Diety) is singular not plural, which may give further insight.

X


Pay attention to the bolded parts and the fact that he capitalizes Deity (dispite his mis-spelling). Is that clear enough or do you want to continue to insult me?

I linked you to the LA Grand Lodge's adopted landmark page (I only linked 1 lodge because if 1 out of 50 don't adopt a monotheism landmark, your claims are effectively debunked)... their adopted landmark page does not include any mention of monotheism whatsoever.

You made the choice to delete the link from the post you quoted. You made the choice to disingenuously respond to my comment about the LA grand lodge landmarks as if I was talking about something else. Why did you make those choices?

You asked a multiple choice question (is it strictly monotheistic or can it be interpreted differently) and you were told you are correct. Did you notice that? That entire alleged email is inconclusive and only proves both parties involved are not concerned with clear and concise wording and explanations... heck, how do I know that isn't you writing both parts to your alleged email?

Imagine you go to apply for a job and you see a sign that says: All applicants must have a running vehicle.
You own 3 running vehicles. What do you do?
1) Apply for the job in good faith that you've met the requirement
2) Go home because you read it as singular when your reality is plural
3) Ask for clarification on whether or not they require an applicant to have one and only one running vehicle

Same thing, this time you are applying to join a Masonic lodge. You get handed some paper that states you are required to have a belief in a Supreme Being.
You believe in more than one god, one of which is supreme to the others. What do you do?
1) Apply in good faith that you've met the requirement because you do believe in a Supreme Being
2) Go home because because no one asked if you believe in more than 1 god
3) Ask for clarification and risk looking like an idiot and/or risk being insulting to the interviewers because they failed to be clear on a seemingly simple question

edit on 28-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
I knew only what you wrote and what you wrote is not consistent with what you are now claiming was your intended message.


I said, and I have been saying that there is nothing in Masonry for the non-monotheistic. You must believe in a Supreme Being, we mention and invoke God during meetings and degrees. The lessons and ritual are not intended nor would they be appreciated by someone who does not meet the belief requirement.

If what you are saying is true, then irregular Freemasonry MUST be fundamentally different than regular Freemasonry or else all non-monotheists would have no interest in membership to irregular lodges.

If no non-monotheist would be interested in joining regular or irregular Masonry, what is the purpose of making a monotheist landmark to distinguish regular lodges from irregular lodges?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
I linked you to the LA Grand Lodge's adopted landmark page (I only linked 1 lodge because if 1 out of 50 don't adopt a monotheism landmark, your claims are effectively debunked)... their adopted landmark page does not include any mention of monotheism whatsoever.


Each Grand Lodge may use different verbage. I posted links pages back where other Grand Lodges include the exact wording. The point is EVERY Grand Lodge in the United States has mutual amity based on their adoption in 1956 of what the Conference of Grand Masters outlined.

If you think this is not the case try joining without having a monotheistic belief. Keep me posted.


You asked a multiple choice question (is it strictly monotheistic or can it be interpreted differently) and you were told you are correct. Did you notice that? That entire alleged email is inconclusive and only proves both parties involved are not concerned with clear and concise wording and explanations...


So are you now trying to allege that you did not understand what the person I was corresponding with was saying because it differs from what you think? Seriously? he was clear. Belief in ONE God, not gods, singular not plural. He was very clear.


...heck, how do I know that isn't you writing both parts to your alleged email?


I could give a crap whether you believe me or not.


Same thing, this time you are applying to join a Masonic lodge. You get handed some paper that states you are required to have a belief in a Supreme Being.
You believe in more than one god, one of which is supreme to the others. What do you do?
1) Apply in good faith that you've met the requirement because you do believe in a Supreme Being
2) Go home because because no one asked if you believe in more than 1 god
3) Ask for clarification and risk looking like an idiot and/or risk being insulting to the interviewers for failing to be clear on a seemingly simple question.


I think the person who was serious about joining would opt for #3 as just about everyone asks for clarification of the requirements either when signing the petition or the investigation.

Additionally, you are forgetting a rather important aspect of joining, you must have 2 signers (sometimes more) to submit your petition. It is their job to ensure that you completely understand the requirements, that they are willing to vouche for you in all aspects that concern the Fraternity and they are typically someone you know in the lodge you are joining.

Do you honestly think people can remain confused on the belief requirement with all of these parameters mentioned?

Hypothetical situation:

Bill asks me to join my lodge. I know Bill is a Pagan (not that I have any issues with Pagans) and explain to Bill that Paganism does not fit the requirements for joining. Bill gets the picture. End of story.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
If what you are saying is true, then irregular Freemasonry MUST be fundamentally different than regular Freemasonry or else all non-monotheists would have no interest in membership to irregular lodges.


I believe there is one Mason on this board who is a member of an irregular lodge and if I remember correctly he may have been in a regular lodge first, he is obviously the best person to ask.


If no non-monotheist would be interested in joining regular or irregular Masonry, what is the purpose of making a monotheist landmark to distinguish regular lodges from irregular lodges?


I did not say a non-montheistic person would not be intersted in joining irregular Masonry. There are irregular bodies that specifically dropped the belief requirement to allow Aethists and other non-monotheisitic religions to join.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Freemasons worship knowledge. Hence the worship of a 40 foot owl at bohemian grove. The reason they have often been associated with satan worship in my opinion, look at the tree of knowledge. If you eat from the tree of knowledge you are laying your arms down with the devil. Many of there rituals are about awakening of knowledge. Which in many cultures in the old days would have been thought to be satan worship or witches.

How one might want to connect the free masons with satan worship is reasonable.

Did not read your post just gave my two cents from the post. Thank you in advanced for responding politely.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ringlejames
Freemasons worship knowledge. Hence the worship of a 40 foot owl at bohemian grove.


The Bohemian Grove has nothing to do with Masonry and Masons do not worship anything in lodge.


If you eat from the tree of knowledge you are laying your arms down with the devil.


Huh? Are you saying that gaining knowledge is Satanic?


Which in many cultures in the old days would have been thought to be satan worship or witches.


News flash. We do not live in the 'old days'.


How one might want to connect the free masons with satan worship is reasonable.


Uh, no, it is not.


Did not read your post just gave my two cents from the post.


*sigh*



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
I linked you to the LA Grand Lodge's adopted landmark page (I only linked 1 lodge because if 1 out of 50 don't adopt a monotheism landmark, your claims are effectively debunked)... their adopted landmark page does not include any mention of monotheism whatsoever.


Each Grand Lodge may use different verbage. I posted links pages back where other Grand Lodges include the exact wording. The point is EVERY Grand Lodge in the United States has mutual amity based on their adoption in 1956 of what the Conference of Grand Masters outlined.

If you think this is not the case try joining without having a monotheistic belief. Keep me posted.
The conference of grand masters updates every annual conference, according to their website... you linked what they said in 1956, I linked what they say TODAY.

Show some proof the 1956 landmarks are universal in the year 2012.

I linked the Louisiana Grand Lodge's landmarks... their landmarks make no mention of monotheism or anything that can be reasonably interpreted as monotheism.

I think I have sufficiently proven that your claims are not as accurate and correct as you assert them to be. You've been effectively refuted.

Now it is your turn to prove me wrong even though you have never proven yourself correct in the first place. Show me proof that in 2012, in the United States for all 50 states, in regular Freemasonry, they currently have an explicit universal monotheistic landmark... and if you are up for it, explain why the LA grand lodge does not include monotheism in their public list of landmarks.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalYou asked a multiple choice question (is it strictly monotheistic or can it be interpreted differently) and you were told you are correct. Did you notice that? That entire alleged email is inconclusive and only proves both parties involved are not concerned with clear and concise wording and explanations...


So are you now trying to allege that you did not understand what the person I was corresponding with was saying because it differs from what you think? Seriously? he was clear. Belief in ONE God, not gods, singular not plural. He was very clear.
No, he was not clear at all.
You asked if it's strictly monotheism or if it's not strictly monotheism... you were told you are correct. That is not a valid answer for an either-or question.

He made it clear theism was a requirement, and he made it clear polytheism was not a requirement... but he did not make it clear that monotheism, and only monotheism, is the requirement. Do you understand what I am saying?


I think the person who was serious about joining would opt for #3 as just about everyone asks for clarification of the requirements either when signing the petition or the investigation.

Now you're being facetious... all my sources say it's not common for a candidate to ask for clarification of the god requirement because you are not asked anything beyond whether or not you are a theist. That kind of questioning hardly needs clarification, even for a serious candidate.

I would love to see paperwork handed to a candidate during this investigation process that specifically mentions the word monotheism, or words that can only be interpreted as monotheism. That seems like an easy claim for regular Masons to prove true, if it were true.
edit on 28-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
If what you are saying is true, then irregular Freemasonry MUST be fundamentally different than regular Freemasonry or else all non-monotheists would have no interest in membership to irregular lodges.


I believe there is one Mason on this board who is a member of an irregular lodge and if I remember correctly he may have been in a regular lodge first, he is obviously the best person to ask.


If no non-monotheist would be interested in joining regular or irregular Masonry, what is the purpose of making a monotheist landmark to distinguish regular lodges from irregular lodges?


I did not say a non-montheistic person would not be intersted in joining irregular Masonry. There are irregular bodies that specifically dropped the belief requirement to allow Aethists and other non-monotheisitic religions to join.
I'm asking you because you are here making claims.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
AugustusMasonicus: They know, and there is nothing for anyone in regular Masonry that appeals to the non-monotheist.

Now, unless there is a fundamental difference between regular and irregular Masonry excluding requirements/rules/constitutions/landmarks/etc, you did in fact imply such a thing. We know you believe implying something is the same as outright saying it... you've made that abundantly clear.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
The conference of grand masters updates every annual conference, according to their website... you linked what they said in 1956, I linked what they say TODAY.


Do you even understand their main purpose? They determine how Grand Lodges recognize other Masonic bodies. They do not update the Landmarks every year, they were adopted in 1956.


Show some proof the 1956 landmarks are universal in the year 2012.


The proof is the mutual recognition that each Grand Lodge has for the others. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Recognition is predicated on obervance of the Landmarks, when they are being observed your Grand Lodge is considered regular, if they stopped your Grand Lodge would be considered irregular. It is quite simple.

You would need to show me that there is NO mutual recognition because of Landmark observance relating to belief. It does not exist because it is obviously being adhered to by ALL Grand Lodges.


I linked the Louisiana Grand Lodge's landmarks... their landmarks make no mention of monotheism or anything that can be reasonably interpreted as monotheism.


Do me a favor. Call them up tomorrow and ask, 'can I join your Grand Lodge if I believe in more than one deity?' and then get back to me with their answer.


I think I have sufficiently proven that your claims are not as accurate and correct as you assert them to be. You've been effectively refuted.

Now it is your turn to prove me wrong even though you have never proven yourself correct in the first place. Show me proof that in 2012, in the United States for all 50 states, in regular Freemasonry, they currently have an explicit universal monotheistic landmark... and if you are up for it, explain why the LA grand lodge does not include monotheism in their public list of landmarks.


You can prove it yourself. Try joining and let me know how it works if you say you believe in something other than ONE Supreme Being.


No, he was not clear at all.


This is not clear?


Belief in a Supreme Being (or Diety)". Being (Diety) is singular not plural.


Singular and not plural is not clear to you? Singular means one. Mono means one. One is no more than one. Stop being obtuse.


Do you understand what I am saying?


Not in the slightest.


Now you're being facetious... all my sources say it's not common for a candidate to ask for clarification of the god requirement because you are not asked anything beyond whether or not you are a theist. That kind of questioning hardly needs clarification, even for a serious candidate.


I think you are misreading your sources. WE can not ask the candidate for clarification. The candidates can ask anything and as much as they want.


I would love to see paperwork handed to a candidate during this investigation process that specifically mentions the word monotheism, or words that can only be interpreted as monotheism. That seems like an easy claim for regular Masons to prove true, if it were true.


I listed Grand Lodges that have this on their websites, call them up and ask for an application.

You also failed to acknowledge the fact that you need signers who are willing to vouch for your veracity and understanding of the requirements. You do not sign a petition for someone who approaches Masonry casually and has no understanding of the requirements. Is this starting to register?

Hypothetical situation 2:

Random guy asks me to join the Masons. I tell him, 'sorry, I do not know you well enough to sponsor you but you are welcome to visit my lodge and meet some of the guys where we can all get to know each other better and dicuss your reasons for joining and the requirements that we have'. Random guy either says, 'yes' or 'no'. If Random Guy opts for 'yes' then we get to know him and we eventually review the requirements for joining; belief, proper age, not a criminal, etc.

I seriously doubt you are going to find a Mason that indiscriminately signs petitions of persons he does not know. We are charged, in the Entered Apprentice Degree, NOT to recommend just anyone but:


If in the circle of your acquaintance, you find a person desirous of being initiated into Masonry, be particularly careful NOT to recommend him, unless you are convinced that he will conform to our rules...


I can ask my friends anything about anything. Once they get to the investigating committee where they are charged to ask the candidate whether he has a belief in a Supreme Being they are not permitted to ask for clarification but the signers will typcially know, hence the reason you would not recommend a person who did not meet the requirements.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Now, unless there is a fundamental difference between regular and irregular Masonry excluding requirements/rules/constitutions/landmarks/etc, you did in fact imply such a thing.


The main point for me would be that there is no mention of God and answering to something bigger than yourself which for me is what the object of Masonry's moral lessons are founded upon. If they do not have this then to me they are fundementally different.

Additionally, many of these jursidictions that dropped the belief requirement also allow women, may permit networking, discussion of politics, etc, which any one of those distinctions singlely can further change the lodge in relation to its regular counterparts let alone when they are compounded.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus


I am still waiting for someone to explain how you can be monotheistic and worship multiple gods.


Where did you get the concept that Lucifer or Satan were gods? They are defined as 'fallen angels', weather you count either/or as gods is up to you, however it is not backed by scripture. Lucifer is the fallen angel who gave man knowledge and wisdom, according to the Bible.

You have not convinced me of the 'devil' ruling over hell, but I see where the confusion can occur. You either have been sucked in by the popular modern portrayal of a 'devil' figure torturing people in 'hell' or have opted for a different interpretation of the word 'with'. The problem with your 'with' is that it is countered by scripture stating that the 'devil' upon final judgement will be thrown into the 'lake of fire' to suffer for ever and ever. If the 'devil' were to rule over anything it would counter the supreme authority of God.

oxforddictionaries.com...



Definition of with
preposition

1accompanied by (another person or thing): a nice steak with a bottle of red wine
in the same direction as: marine mammals generally swim with the current
along with (with reference to time): wisdom comes with age
in proportion to: the form of the light curve changes with period in a systematic way

2possessing (something) as a feature or accompaniment: a flower-sprigged blouse with a white collar
marked by or wearing: a tall dark man with a scar on one cheek a small man with thick glasses

3indicating the instrument used to perform an action: cut it with a knife treatment with acid before analysis
indicating the material used for some purpose: fill the bowl with water

4in opposition to: we started fighting with each other

5indicating the manner or attitude of the person doing something: with great reluctance

6indicating responsibility: leave it with me

7in relation to: my father will be angry with me

8employed by: she’s with IBM now
as a member or employee of: he plays with the Cincinnati Cyclones
using the services of: I bank with the TSB

9affected by (a particular fact or condition): with no hope in bed with lumbago
indicating the cause of an action or condition: trembling with fear the paper was yellow with age

10indicating separation or removal from something: to part with one’s dearest possessions their jobs could be dispensed with




All of them will rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the former eternal glory with Christ


The only reference I can find of the 'devil' ruling hell is in literature which is not taken as scripture. You are going to have to find evidence of the Roman Catholics, such as a priest/bishop/deacon/cardinal/pope, stating that the devil rules over hell otherwise one must refer to scripture for clarity on the use of the word 'with' concerning 'hell' and the 'devil'.

As it stands now you are giving your own interpretation of the usage of 'with' preference over what is supported by historical documentation of the concept and scripture.


edit on 28-10-2012 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
The conference of grand masters updates every annual conference, according to their website... you linked what they said in 1956, I linked what they say TODAY.


Do you even understand their main purpose? They determine how Grand Lodges recognize other Masonic bodies. They do not update the Landmarks every year, they were adopted in 1956.

I didn't say or imply they update landmarks every year, just that there are still annual conferences and any changes get updated.

www.recognitioncommission.org...



After each Annual Meeting of the Conference of Grand Masters, the report, given to and adopted by the Conference, is printed and copies mailed to the Grand Secretaries and to the Chairmen of the Committees on Fraternal Relations of the Grand Lodges of the Conference. Copies are mailed to many interested Grand Lodges who are not members of the Conference. This report is based upon the most recent information available, and, in some cases, after a presentation by representatives of the Grand Lodges mentioned in the report.


Well, these guys are saying on their website, in plain English, that they use the most recent information available AND that:

The standards of Recognition are summarized as follows:

* Legitimacy of Origin
* Exclusive Territorial Jurisdiction, except by mutual consent and/or treaty.
* Adherence to the Ancient Landmarks � specifically, a Belief in God, the Volume of Sacred Law as an indispensable part of the Furniture of the Lodge, and the prohibition of the discussion of politics and religion.
Theism, not monotheism, seems to be the current standard.
Show me proof that current standards of recognition for 2012 specifically state monotheism.


The proof is the mutual recognition that each Grand Lodge has for the others. Why is this so hard for you to understand? Recognition is predicated on obervance of the Landmarks, when they are being observed your Grand Lodge is considered regular, if they stopped your Grand Lodge would be considered irregular. It is quite simple.

You would need to show me that there is NO mutual recognition because of Landmark observance relating to belief. It does not exist because it is obviously being adhered to by ALL Grand Lodges.
I showed you the recognized Louisiana Grand Lodge does NOT recognize monotheism as a requirement. That just so happened to be the first grand lodge I investigated and it seems pretty clear they have not adopted a monotheistic landmark of any kind.
www.la-mason.com...

Is that or is that not a recognized Grand Lodge of regular Freemasonry, in the US?
I don't understand what you are telling me I need to show you, you trailed off into some vague gibberish. Why don't you show me how LA has adopted a landmark of monotheism, or show me that this LA grand lodge is not recognized as meeting the standards of recognition.


Do me a favor. Call them up tomorrow and ask, 'can I join your Grand Lodge if I believe in more than one deity?' and then get back to me with their answer.
I'll do something better... I'll call them up and ask what their requirements are. Then I'll ask if their website is up to date with the most recent information for their adopted landmarks. Then I'll ask if they are recognized. THEN I'll ask if I can join if I believe in the existence of more than one deity.


You can prove it yourself. Try joining and let me know how it works if you say you believe in something other than ONE Supreme Being.
No, sorry, I will not lie and manipulate my way into the investigation process for answers... I have no interest in joining or lying about joining.


This is not clear?


Belief in a Supreme Being (or Diety)". Being (Diety) is singular not plural.


Singular and not plural is not clear to you? Singular means one. Mono means one. One is no more than one. Stop being obtuse.
You are being obtuse be insisting there are any reasonable implication that suggest it's exclusive to one and only one.
It's crystal clear they are asking for some kind of theism.
It's crystal clear they are not specifically asking for polytheism.
What is NOT clear is whether or not that means it's exclusive to monotheism.
What is NOT clear is whether or not polytheism is specifically excluded.

If you don't understand this, you are not applying valid critical thinking skills and/or you are struggling to grasp the nuances of the English language. I'm not trying to be rude but I believe a child could understand this so I don't get why you fail to understand it.


I listed Grand Lodges that have this [information pamphlets for candidates] on their websites, call them up and ask for an application.
Can you please relink the Grand Lodge? I must have missed your previous link.
edit on 28-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

I think you are misreading your sources. WE can not ask the candidate for clarification. The candidates can ask anything and as much as they want.
Nope, my sources are consistent with the interviewers not asking specific question about faith and the interviewers never clearly explaining the God requirement in a way that can only be interpreted as belief in one and only one God. My sources are also consistent in saying it's up to the candidate to ask specific questions about faith requirements.

What is there to be confused about when the question simply asks if you believe in God?


You also failed to acknowledge the fact that you need signers who are willing to vouch for your veracity and understanding of the requirements. You do not sign a petition for someone who approaches Masonry casually and has no understanding of the requirements. Is this starting to register?
How can you say I fail to acknowledge that when I've been repeating myself over and over that the requirement is so easily understood as simply a belief in God?

A misunderstanding is not the same as no understanding. If all parties assume there is an understanding and it's never double checked as standard protocol because the interviewers are specifically prohibited from asking faith questions, you cannot tell me every candidate has a full and CORRECT understanding.

Let's not also forget it's possible to be made a Mason on sight, but I assume that is not common practice.
edit on 28-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Originally posted by Erbal


Let's not also forget it's possible to be made a Mason on sight, but I assume that is not common practice.
edit on 28-10-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)


Well from this we can investigate other requirements by researching those who were made masons on sight and what their beliefs and practices were.

Case 1 Mormonism;
Mormonism and Freemasonry
en.wikipedia.org...


A significant numbers of leaders in the early Latter Day Saint movement were Masons prior to their involvement in the movement. Notable examples include Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, John C. Bennett, Hyrum Smith and Joseph Smith, Sr.

In the early 1840s a Masonic Lodge was formed by LDS Church members who were Freemasons. Joseph Smith, Jr. and his brother Hyrum became members of the newly formed Nauvoo lodge. It appears that John C. Bennet had a particularly strong influence in the spread of Freemasonry, and soon over 1,500 Mormon men in the city of Nauvoo were practicing Masons. LDS historian Reed Durham writes:

"By 1840, John Cook Bennett, a former active leader in Masonry had arrived in Commerce and rapidly exerted his persuasive leadership in all facets of the Church, including Mormon Masonry. ... Joseph and Sidney [Rigdon] were inducted into formal Masonry ... on the same day..." being made "Masons on Sight" by the Illinois Grandmaster.("Is There No Help for the Widow's Son?" by Dr. Reed C. Durham, Jr., as printed in "Joseph Smith and Masonry: No Help for the Widow's Son", Martin Pub. Co., Nauvoo, Ill., 1980, p. 17.) (This freed Joseph from having to complete the ritual and memorization necessary to work one's way through the first three degrees.) Making one "A Mason on Sight" is generally reserved as an honor and is a rarity in occurrence.


en.wikipedia.org...


Distinctive doctrines and practices
Main article: Beliefs and practices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
A couple after their marriage in the Manti Utah Temple

Several doctrines and practices of the LDS Church are unique within Christianity. For example, the Mormon cosmology and plan of salvation include the doctrines of a pre-mortal life, three degrees of heaven, and exaltation. According to these doctrines every human spirit is a literal child of Heavenly Father, and each has the potential to continue to learn, grow, and progress in the eternities, eventually achieving eternal life (which Latter-day Saints view as distinct from immortality), which is to become one with God in the same way that Jesus Christ is one with the Father, thus allowing the children of God to become divine beings or "gods" themselves.[63] Achieving this same status is also referred to as becoming a "joint-heir with Christ."[64] The process by which this is done is called exaltation, a doctrine which includes the reunification of the mortal family after the resurrection and the ability to have spirit children in the afterlife and inherit a portion of God's kingdom.[65] To obtain this state of godhood, the church teaches that one must have faith in Jesus Christ, repent of his or her sins, strive to keep the commandments faithfully, and participate in a sequence of ceremonial covenants called ordinances, which include baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, the Endowment, and celestial marriage.[66][67]

. . .

Authorized texts
The written canon of the LDS Church is referred to as its Standard Works.
See also: Standard Works and Revelation (Latter Day Saints)

The theology of the LDS Church consists of a combination of biblical doctrines with modern revelations and other commentary by LDS leaders, particularly Joseph Smith, Jr. The most authoritative sources of theology are the faith's canon of four religious texts, called the Standard Works. Included in the Standard Works are the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. Among these books, the church holds in equal esteem as the other Standard Works the Book of Mormon, said by the church to be "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" that Joseph Smith translated from buried golden plates.


Whoa . . . .

Making a Mason at Sight
By Bro. Wildey E. Atchison, Colorado
masonicdictionary.com...

27th president of the US William Howard Taft (en.wikipedia.org...). 27 is a solar number 3^3 and is symbolized in masonry by three masons joining their hands at the top waste and feet together.


William Howard Taft, Ex-President of the United States, was made a Mason "at sight," shortly before his inauguration in 1909. The ceremony took place at the Scottish Rite Cathedral in Cincinnati, on February 18th of that year, of which the following account appears in the review on Foreign Correspondence in the Colorado Grand Lodge Proceedings of 1910:


All in all he does not seem like a horrible person but I do find the League to Enforce Peace more than a bit concerning (world police anyone?).

League to Enforce Peace
en.wikipedia.org...


The League to Enforce Peace (LEP) was an American organization established in 1915 to promote the formation of an international body for world peace.

With the formation of the League of Nations in 1919 the LEP changed focus slightly to raise grass roots American support for the League of Nations.



edit on 28-10-2012 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


Interesting. I forgot about Mormons because I don't know a lot about them.

Don't they believe in 3 separate and distinct Gods? And don't they believe Jesus and Lucifer are brothers?
And of course they believe humans not only can turn into gods but that also some humans have successfully turned into gods, right?

Is this accurate?



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
Where did you get the concept that Lucifer or Satan were gods?


I never did. As far as I am concerned they do not even exist.


If the 'devil' were to rule over anything it would counter the supreme authority of God.


I agree with this and it is another reason why I discount the popular conception of Satan.


The only reference I can find of the 'devil' ruling hell is in literature which is not taken as scripture.


And I prefaced this thread in the Original Post by mentioning this very fact. Not all Christian mythology is sourced from the Bible.


You are going to have to find evidence of the Roman Catholics, such as a priest/bishop/deacon/cardinal/pope, stating that the devil rules over hell otherwise one must refer to scripture for clarity on the use of the word 'with' concerning 'hell' and the 'devil'.


Jesuit Priest, Peter Binsfield, felt that both Lucifer and Satan were one of the seven rulers of hell.


As it stands now you are giving your own interpretation of the usage of 'with' preference over what is supported by historical documentation of the concept and scripture.


As I mentioned earlier, not all aspects of Christian Mythos derives itself from the Bible. There are numerous incidents of mythology having their sources eslewhere.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
I didn't say or imply they update landmarks every year, just that there are still annual conferences and any changes get updated.


And the three main Landmarks have not been altered since 1956.


Show me proof that current standards of recognition for 2012 specifically state monotheism.


Here are several Grand Lodges with the word 'monotheism' in their description or requirements:

From the Grand Lodge if Indiana:


The following Landmarks are common to all officially adopted lists:
(1) Monotheism is the sole dogma of Freemasonry. Belief in one God is
required of every initiate, but his conception of the Supreme Being is left to his
own interpretation. Freemasonry is not concerned with theological distinctions.
This is the basis of our universality.


From the Massachusetts Grand Lodge website:


Masonry is not a religion. But it is one of the few platforms where men of all monotheistic faiths - Christians (including Catholics), Jews, and Muslims - can come together because it is open to all men who believe in a Supreme Being;


From the Grand Lodge of Georgia:


It is religious in that it teaches monotheism; the Volume of the Sacred Law is open upon its altars whenever a Lodge is in session; reverence for God is ever present in its ceremonial, and to its brethren are constantly addressed lessons of morality; yet it is not sectarian or theological.


From the Grand Lodge of Alabama help you:


What Freemasons Believe In

All Freemasons believe in one God and in respect for each other.



I showed you the recognized Louisiana Grand Lodge does NOT recognize monotheism as a requirement. That just so happened to be the first grand lodge I investigated and it seems pretty clear they have not adopted a monotheistic landmark of any kind.
www.la-mason.com...

Is that or is that not a recognized Grand Lodge of regular Freemasonry, in the US?
I don't understand what you are telling me I need to show you, you trailed off into some vague gibberish. Why don't you show me how LA has adopted a landmark of monotheism, or show me that this LA grand lodge is not recognized as meeting the standards of recognition.


Just because the exact verbage is not there does not mean that it is not being adhered to or is not a requirement. Belief in A (one) Supreme Being is a requirement in every Grand Lodge.


I'll do something better... I'll call them up and ask what their requirements are. Then I'll ask if their website is up to date with the most recent information for their adopted landmarks. Then I'll ask if they are recognized. THEN I'll ask if I can join if I believe in the existence of more than one deity.


Good. Then get back to me. I suggest you reach out to someone at the Grand Lodge level as they are responsible for ensuring that the Landmarks are adhered to, perhaps the Grand Secretary.


No, sorry, I will not lie and manipulate my way into the investigation process for answers... I have no interest in joining or lying about joining.


You do not need to lie about anything, just ask, 'can I join if I believe in more than one deity?'


You are being obtuse be insisting there are any reasonable implication that suggest it's exclusive to one and only one.
It's crystal clear they are asking for some kind of theism.


Yeah. Mono.


If you don't understand this, you are not applying valid critical thinking skills and/or you are struggling to grasp the nuances of the English language. I'm not trying to be rude but I believe a child could understand this so I don't get why you fail to understand it.


Who's critical thinking skills are not being applied to the passages I posted above from other Grand Lodge websites and which I linked earlier in a response directed to you?


Can you please relink the Grand Lodge? I must have missed your previous link.


Done.




top topics



 
52
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join