Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
It's simply not true... ANY Mason can worship Lucifer if they so desire to do so... and we both know it's a statistical fact that some Masons have and do worship Lucifer.

Then they have lied to gain addmission because as has bene explained ad naseum from the very beginning of this thread that Lucifer is NOT A SUPREME BEING.

Lying to gain addmission is grounds for immediate expulsion and the person so lying is not considered a Mason. As every Mason knows the answer to the question, 'Where were you first made a Mason', is, 'In my heart'. Lying to yourself is worse than lying to others.

Stop going in circles.
There is no reason anyone has to lie during the admission process because the entire faith aspect of the requirements is INTENTIONALLY AND DELIBERATELY left open to interpretation!

Because of the religious freedom that allows Masons to worship Lucifer if they so desire, it is explicitly forbidden for Masons to ask specifics about initiates/members faith so that men of ALL faiths can sit together in a lodge. This is the only rule more strictly enforced than the fact you need to be any kind of theist to become a member.

Your claims about Lucifer and Supreme Beings have been effectively debunked for a long time now and you've squandered countless opportunities to prove your claims valid and true.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Not 1 Mason in this thread has attempted to explain why the standard of recognition clearly describes theism and not monotheism.

Not one Erbal on this thread has disproved that monotheism is not the standard of recognition. All the Erbals have done is show that, apparently, until we have a link from every single Grand Lodge with the correct verbage (in his mind) that he will not admit he is incorrect.

Why are you ignoring the Commission on Information for Recognition, who states in plain English that "a belief in God" is the law?
www.recognitioncommission.org...

This proves theism, not monotheism, is the standard of recognition. You haven't even acknowledged it and I've posted it maybe 8 times so far. Are you just going to continue ignoring it until you find a good explanation for it?

Originally posted by Erbal
There is no reason anyone has to lie during the admission process...

Really? Is that so? You obviously know what is in every person's heart and conscious when they petition.

We had several people lie to get into our lodge. Most for mercenary motives that were monetarily driven. All expose themselves and all are eventually supsended and expelled.

...because the entire faith aspect of the requirements is INTENTIONALLY AND DELIBERATELY left open to interpretation!

If you say so. You continue to gloss over the fact that you need at least two petitioners that KNOW you. It is their job to make sure that you understand the principles and practices of the Fraternity. Please refer to my previous hypothetical scenarios (which really are not that hypothetical because they happen).

Because of the religious freedom that allows Masons to worship Lucifer if they so desire...

We already explained that worshipping a fallen angel (Lucifer) would preclude one from joining as Lucifer is not a Supreme Being and I have listed the monotheism requirements from several states suporting this. Do you need more as you have been strangely silent on addressing this?

...it is explicitly forbidden for Masons to ask specifics about initiates/members faith so that men of ALL faiths can sit together in a lodge. This is the only rule more strictly enforced than the fact you need to be any kind of theist to become a member.

You still do not understand how Masonry works. We can not explicitly ask during the interview/investigation process or during the degrees. We can however, as friends, determine what a person's faith is prior to handing them a petition.

Your claims about Lucifer and Supreme Beings have been effectively debunked for a long time now and you've squandered countless opportunities to prove your claims valid and true.

The numeorus, and completely ignored, links that I provided prove that you are flailing and floundering about aimlessly in an attempt to support your hopeless position.

Originally posted by Erbal
Why are you ignoring the Commission on Information for Recognition...

I was the one who originally linked the 1956 Landmark agreement which included the verbiage 'monotheism'. There is nothing to ignore other then the multiple links I provided which uphold this premise.

I also supplied correspondence with a Past Grand Master on the Commision which supported my statements.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

We are talking about just the faith aspect so your stories of lying about other aspects of the application process are completely irrelevant.

We've ran in circles talking about how "a belief in a Supreme Being" does not inherently include or exclude worship of anything. So why are you still spewing out nonsense about belief in a Supreme Being means you can't worship Lucifer?

And what makes you think you have a monopoly on the interpretation of who and what Lucifer, or anything related to that subject, actually is? Interpretations of faith are ultimately PERSONAL AND INDIVIDUAL. What you think is a Supreme Being has no bearing on what others think is a Supreme Being.

I've already admitted that every Grand Lodge is free to require monotheism instead of the standard for recognition that is CURRENTLY just theism. But it's been absolutely proven that not all Grand Lodges have made the choice to require monotheism, in fact, a vast majority have decided to stick with the standard of just theism.

And you did post a source from 1953 about monotheism being a requirement... and I posted a more current and relevant source that shows how TODAY the requirement for recognition is THEISM in general. You keep ignoring the most recent source and you keep pretending your source from 60 years ago is still valid despite you never actually trying to prove your source is currently valid for recognition.

You are spamming your own thread with blatant misinformation and disinformation. Your arguments are intentionally dishonest and misleading. You are clearly trying to force all the facts to fit into your preconceived conclusions that Masons cannot worship Lucifer... you are too biased and vested in this to accept any other outcome. Ergo why you are spamming this thread repeating your lies over and over until they drown out any resistance and you are the only one left talking.

Enough is enough. It's over.

Originally posted by Erbal
We are talking about just the faith aspect so your stories of lying about other aspects of the application process are completely irrelevant.

Lying on the application or during the interview process for any reason is relevant as it is grounds for immediate suspension and explusion.

We've ran in circles talking about how "a belief in a Supreme Being" does not inherently include or exclude worship of anything. So why are you still spewing out nonsense about belief in a Supreme Being means you can't worship Lucifer?

Becasue of the monotheistic aspect that I have been citing.

And what makes you think you have a monopoly on the interpretation of who and what Lucifer, or anything related to that subject, actually is? Interpretations of faith are ultimately PERSONAL AND INDIVIDUAL. What you think is a Supreme Being has no bearing on what others think is a Supreme Being.

Explain to me how a fallen angel is a Supreme Being.

I've already admitted that every Grand Lodge is free to require monotheism instead of the standard for recognition that is CURRENTLY just theism. But it's been absolutely proven that not all Grand Lodges have made the choice to require monotheism, in fact, a vast majority have decided to stick with the standard of just theism.

And you are basing this on what? Your diligent research or the fact that I have not been compelled by your constant goal post shifting to site each and every Grand Lodge with a link that satisfies your requirements?

And you did post a source from 1953 about monotheism being a requirement... and I posted a more current and relevant source that shows how TODAY the requirement for recognition is THEISM in general. You keep ignoring the most recent source and you keep pretending your source from 60 years ago is still valid despite you never actually trying to prove your source is currently valid for recognition.

The Landmark goes back even further. This is what you still do not grasp about Masonry. Aspects that were used and active 300 years ago are still used and active. That is the point, Masonry does not change its fundementals indiscriminantly, this is part of its superstructure and foundation.

You are spamming your own thread with blatant misinformation and disinformation. Your arguments are intentionally dishonest and misleading. You are clearly trying to force all the facts to fit into your preconceived conclusions that Masons cannot worship Lucifer... you are too biased and vested in this to accept any other outcome. Ergo why you are spamming this thread repeating your lies over and over until they drown out any resistance and you are the only one left talking.

My links from other Grand Lodges, that you ignore, are not lies, they support what I have been saying. Either refute them or accept them as the fact that they are.

Enough is enough. It's over.

Sure, whatever you say.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus

Theism is a general type of belief.
Monotheism is a specific type of belief.
Worship is a specific type of action.

Belief =/= Action

I am not concerned with defining what Lucifer is or is not when you can't give proof or a compelling argument that Masonry puts restrictions on which religious entities can or cannot be worshiped by Masons.

Now if you want to talk about the earliest known landmarks, you will be lying if you claim it's not a subject of longstanding controversy. The first attempt to codify the ancient landmarks wasn't done until 1858 by Mackey, and those landmarks clearly states "A belief in the existence of God", otherwise known as theism, and they made zero implications about monotheism.

Stop with the circular and strawman arguments... enough is enough.

Originally posted by Erbal
Theism is a general type of belief.
Monotheism is a specific type of belief.
Worship is a specific type of action.

Belief =/= Action

Action can nullify belief.

I am not concerned with defining what Lucifer is or is not when you can't give proof or a compelling argument that Masonry puts restrictions on which religious entities can or cannot be worshiped by Masons.

It most certainly does. Lucifer is a fallen angel, worship of a fallen angel does not constitute monotheism.

Now if you want to talk about the earliest known landmarks, you will be lying if you claim it's not a subject of longstanding controversy. The first attempt to codify the ancient landmarks wasn't done until 1858 by Mackey, and those landmarks clearly states "A belief in the existence of God", otherwise known as theism, and they made zero implications about monotheism.

The controversy does not swirl about the 'big three', belief, volume of sacred law and prohibiting discussion of religion or politics. The controversy is from other, and sometimes, extraneous Landmarks that other Jurisdictions feel they do not have to adopt.

The The Grand Lodge of Minnesota, as of 2002, still based its recognition standards on the 1956 codification:

III. Ancient Landmarks (as listed in annual proceedings)

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.

They used these Landmarks to recognize The Grand Lodge of France and the continuing recognition of other Grand Lodges including the 50 Grand Lodges of the United States. If the Grand Lodges were not in adherence then they would not be recognized. Why is this still not clear to you?

Stop with the circular and strawman arguments... enough is enough.

Stop ignoring contemporary Masonic jurisprudence and law. This is the basis for all Masonic action in regards other Grand Lodges.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


The FLC does NOT support the viewpoint you put forth on the 'devil' and 'hell', that is what I have taken issue with this entire time. You persist in arguing that a 'devil' presides over 'hell' when there is not official doctrine of the sort, a famous book does not count. This is a popular religion which specifies the meanings for its followers unlike masonry where you can attribute anything you like to a symbol in addition to the official meaning. The texts of the religion state that the 'devil' attempts to make their throne on Earth and ascend it into the heavens above the throne of God (the supreme being). This gets at the fruit of knowledge given to man by the 'devil' as it is in line with what masonry often holds as its highest ideal of knowledge (the light) and the feeling or showing reverence and adoration towards it.

Your use of worshipful is in line with what I have continually put forth as its roots come from worship and the adjective form to which you have continually denied veracity to because it does NOT place worship solely towards a deity but towards a person or ideal. The use of worship in this form breaks down the entire basis of your argument that worship can only be given to a deity if one has a belief in them which is thoroughly false as you can plainly see.

I provided the lodges in which these items can be viewed. If you don't believe the words of a best selling author and master mason in David Ovason then that is your issue.

I do find it hilarious that a member of the masons and this board enters the discussion and when their personal experience does not match what you are spewing you immediately denounce their membership in the fraternity, defensive much?

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
The FLC does NOT support the viewpoint you put forth on the 'devil' and 'hell', that is what I have taken issue with this entire time. You persist in arguing that a 'devil' presides over 'hell' when there is not official doctrine of the sort, a famous book does not count. This is a popular religion which specifies the meanings for its followers...

Which is then intermixed with other sources to produce the common mis-conception of Satan and Hell that I spoke of in my Original Post.

Your use of worshipful is in line with what I have continually put forth as its roots come from worship and the adjective form to which you have continually denied veracity to because it does NOT place worship solely towards a deity but towards a person or ideal. The use of worship in this form breaks down the entire basis of your argument that worship can only be given to a deity if one has a belief in them which is thoroughly false as you can plainly see.

Are you now saying your source, the Oxford Dictionary, is incorrect? Then why did you use it in the first place? Its definition is exactly the terminology used in regards Masonry since Maosnry itself is archaic in an historical sense.

I provided the lodges in which these items can be viewed. If you don't believe the words of a best selling author and master mason in David Ovason then that is your issue.

You provided crap, a bunch of unlinked citations. Learn to link your sources. The only one that makes reference to the location of an item, the mug, has nothing to do with the Great Seal.

I do find it hilarious that a member of the masons and this board enters the discussion and when their personal experience does not match what you are spewing you immediately denounce their membership in the fraternity, defensive much?

Because his 'opinion' runs counter to what every other Mason on this board will tell you.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


I referenced an actual book apologies if that threw you off.

The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital: The Masons and the Building of Washington, D.C.
www.amazon.com...=la_B001IXOESW_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1352332555&sr=1-1

For an image of the medal go 2/3 of the way down the page.
garyosborn.moonfruit.com...#/the-great-pyramid-angle/4569120816

Or just search for 1742 masonic coin with pyramid as and click images.

The argument about the 'devil' and 'hell' was the same as the untrue but highly popular one stemming from Dante. But it is clear you understand the difference now so I need not push the point further.

Again worshipful comes from the adjective form of worship which merely proves does not require a deity to worship. Does this really need to be argued further? Worship can be of knowledge, as in great admiration and respect for said knowledge.

So is this now going to degrade into an argument over what a brother 'receiving the light' means?

Oh and who is to say any of you proclaimed masons are really masons? You can not prove it without giving up anonymity so why bother pushing it as he said he is now a member of an irregular lodge.

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
For an image of the medal go 2/3 of the way down the page.
garyosborn.moonfruit.com...#/the-great-pyramid-angle/4569120816

Or just search for 1742 masonic coin with pyramid as and click images.

What does this coin have to do with the Great Seal? The Great Seal has an unfinished pyramid and this one is obviously completed.

The argument about the 'devil' and 'hell' was the same as the untrue but highly popular one stemming from Dante. But it is clear you understand the difference now so I need not push the point further.

The point was always understood as evidence by my Original Post.

Again worshipful comes from the adjective form of worship which merely proves does not require a deity to worship. Does this really need to be argued further? Worship can be of knowledge, as in great admiration and respect for said knowledge.

The Masonic context is clear as displayed by your own source, the Oxford Dictionary.

So is this now going to degrade into an argument over what a brother 'receiving the light' means?

No, it is more of a serious doubt as to his veracity.

Oh and who is to say any of you proclaimed masons are really masons? You can not prove it without giving up anonymity so why bother pushing it as he said he is now a member of an irregular lodge.

I could prove mine if need be. I could photgraph my dues card with any item(s) requested and post it to prove authenticity (with my name blacked out of course due to Terms and Conditions).

I have however met several of the Masons on this site and they know who I am.

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


If you count 13 steps on the left side of the pyramid it clearly is notched in the same location as that of the great seal. It is also a drop in the bucket of evidence identifying the pyramid as a popular masonic symbol of the time.

Again your OP is based on a false and/or extremely limited definition of the word worship.

Also please provide your sources as to Lucifer being the planet Venus. I have read that the 'devil' roams the Earth as a hungry lion seeking those he may devour and the lion has always been a solar symbol (ie: radiant mane) which also fits the definition of a morning and evening star.

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
If you count 13 steps on the left side of the pyramid it clearly is notched in the same location as that of the great seal. It is also a drop in the bucket of evidence identifying the pyramid as a popular masonic symbol of the time.

The Great Seal is not 'notched' it is unfinished and it still has nothing to do with Masonry as Thomson was not a Mason.

Again your OP is based on a false and/or extremely limited definition of the word worship.

The Original Post is clear. Monotheism does not allow you to worship anything other than God.

Also please provide your sources as to Lucifer being the planet Venus.

lūcĭfer , fĕra, fĕrum, adj. lux-fero,

...

A. The morning-star, the planet Venus: “stella Lucifer interdiu, noctu Hesperus ita circumeunt,” Varr. R. R. 3, 5, 17: stella Veneris, quae Φωσφόρος Graece, Latine dicitur Lucifer, cum antegreditur solem, cum subsequitur autem Hesperos, Cic. N. D. 2, 20, 53: “si dormire incipis ortu Luciferi,” Juv. 8, 12; 13, 158; cf. Plin. 2, 8, 6, § 36; Tib. 1, 10 (9), 62; Ov. Tr. 1, 3, 71.— Original Latin Meaning for Lucifer

reply to post by AugustusMasonicus


Thompson was not a mason but of the two men who originally worked on and recommended the Egyptian theme, one was a mason (Franklin) and the other was highly respected among masons Jefferson.


If you are going to go back through translations you may as well skip the Latin and go directly to the Greek or Hebrew.

Christianity
Main article: Devil in Christianity

Early Christians were influenced by the association of Isaiah 14:12-15 with the Devil, which had developed in the period between the writing of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament[43], also called the Intertestamental Period when the Deuterocanonical Books were written. Even in the New Testament itself, Sigve K Tonstad argues, the War in Heaven theme of Revelation 12:7-9, in which the dragon "who is called the devil and Satan … was thrown down to the earth", derives from the passage in Isaiah 14.[44] Origen (184/185 – 253/254) interpreted such Old Testament passages as being about manifestations of the Devil; but of course, writing in Greek, not Latin, he did not identify the Devil with the name "Lucifer".[45] Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225), who wrote in Latin, also understood Isaiah 14:14 ("I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High") as spoken by the Devil,[46] but

"Lucifer" is not among the numerous names and phrases he used to describe the Devil.

[47] Even at the time of the Latin writer Augustine of Hippo (354 – 430), "Lucifer" had not yet become a common name for the Devil.[45] But some time later, the metaphor of the morning star that Isaiah 14:12 applied to a king of Babylon gave rise to the general use of the Latin word for "morning star", capitalized, as the original name of the Devil before his fall from grace, linking Isaiah 14:12 with Luke 10:18 ("I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven") and interpreting the passage in Isaiah as an allegory of Satan's fall from heaven.[48][49]

However, Christians have continued to understand the mention of the morning star in Isaiah 14:12 as a metaphor referring to a king of Babylon. Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393 – c. 457) wrote that Isaiah calls the king "morning star", not as being the star, but as having had the illusion of being it.[50] The same understanding is shown in Christian translations of the passage, which in English generally use "morning star" rather than treating the word as a proper name, "Lucifer". So too in other languages, such as French,[51] German,[52] Portuguese,[53] and Spanish.[54] Even the Vulgate text in Latin is printed with lower-case lucifer (morning star), not upper-case Lucifer (proper name).[55]

It seems your understanding of the use of Lucifer is also inaccurate.

You still do not understand that there are different forms of worship, it is not exclusive to a deity . . . are you daft?
It has already been outlined that the 'devil' is not a supreme being therefore falling under the section of the definition 'great admiration or devotion shown towards a person or principle' or the verb 'feel great admiration or devotion for'. In the Biblical understanding (as you have outlined for your thread) it was the 'devil' who tempted man to eat of the fruit of knowledge and become as gods. Become a better man, receive the light, knowledge, all fairly relevant to masonry.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

 

All regular Masons are required to have a belief in a Supreme Being, i.e. God

It therefore becomes quite obvious why any Mason obligated to believe in God would not and could not call God by the name Lucifer or Satan.

 

Why did the OP make the initial claim all Masons are required to have a belief in God but 40 pages later it changed into claiming all Masons are required to only worship God and all Masons are required to believe in the existence of only one God?

What changed, the OP's truth or the OP's lies?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
Theism is a general type of belief.
Monotheism is a specific type of belief.
Worship is a specific type of action.

Belief =/= Action

Action can nullify belief.

That is suspiciously vague. Can you expand on that so it's clear what YOU are talking about?

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalI am not concerned with defining what Lucifer is or is not when you can't give proof or a compelling argument that Masonry puts restrictions on which religious entities can or cannot be worshiped by Masons.

It most certainly does. Lucifer is a fallen angel, worship of a fallen angel does not constitute monotheism.

Is a fallen angel a God? If not, it would then be permitted for a Mason to believe in the existence of Lucifer AND worship him, as long as they still believe in the existence of at least one God to satisfy the theism requirement (or only one God if they are in the few jurisdictions that require monotheism).

Either Lucifer is a God or Lucifer is not a God... but you can't have it both ways with a double standard.

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalNow if you want to talk about the earliest known landmarks, you will be lying if you claim it's not a subject of longstanding controversy. The first attempt to codify the ancient landmarks wasn't done until 1858 by Mackey, and those landmarks clearly states "A belief in the existence of God", otherwise known as theism, and they made zero implications about monotheism.

The controversy does not swirl about the 'big three', belief, volume of sacred law and prohibiting discussion of religion or politics. The controversy is from other, and sometimes, extraneous Landmarks that other Jurisdictions feel they do not have to adopt.

The The Grand Lodge of Minnesota, as of 2002, still based its recognition standards on the 1956 codification:

Recognition Standards of Grand Lodges

Although most grand lodges and advisory bodies have somewhat different standards, they all agree on several crucial points. The following are the Standards adopted for use by The Commission on Information for Recognition of the Conference of Grand Masters of Masons in North America (or Conference of Grand Masters of North America - COGMNA). This commission was established in 1952 to provide information to constituent GLs as to whether or not it considers that the GL in question meets the requirements of regularity, but it has no authority to recommend or advise. The Commission consists of six members who each serve six years; one new member, usually a DGM, is elected each year. Their list of standards includes most of those generally considered important to regulating the Craft:[2]

III. Ancient Landmarks (as listed in annual proceedings)

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.

Your link says it follows The Commission on Information for Recognition.
At the website for the source of the standards of recognition, they explicitly do NOT mention anything that can reasonably interpreted as monotheism.

www.recognitioncommission.org...
It's the link I have posted 10 times and you've ignored or dismissed 10 times.

The standards of recognition is just plain theism.

They used these Landmarks to recognize The Grand Lodge of France and the continuing recognition of other Grand Lodges including the 50 Grand Lodges of the United States. If the Grand Lodges were not in adherence then they would not be recognized. Why is this still not clear to you?

They follow the standards of recognition advocated by the Commission on Information of Recognition!
Here, I'll post the link again. Theism is currently the standard. All regular Grand Lodges are consistent with theism as the standard of recognition.

www.recognitioncommission.org...

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
Thompson was not a mason but of the two men who originally worked on and recommended the Egyptian theme, one was a mason (Franklin) and the other was highly respected among masons Jefferson.

Thompson (sic) did not use any of the designs that Franklin or Jefferson suggested on the First Committee. Franklin wanted Moses inundating Pharaoh and there is no pyramid on the original submission. Thomson opted for only one piece of their design, the Eye of Providence.

If you are going to go back through translations you may as well skip the Latin and go directly to the Greek or Hebrew.

Why? The mistranslation happened from the Greek to the Latin which is the point I made.

"Lucifer" is not among the numerous names and phrases he used to describe the Devil.

...

It seems your understanding of the use of Lucifer is also inaccurate.

Jerome would have seen the Hebrew words as 'O star of the morning, son of the dawn', as 'Helel', 'the shining' or 'brilliant one', and 'ben Shahar', 'son of the dawn'. Instead of correctly using the Hebrew name, 'Hehel', Jerome substituted the Latin, 'Lucifer'. Subsequently changing the meaning of the verse from 'morning star' to 'light bearer'.

The defintion I supplied earlier is correct.

You still do not understand that there are different forms of worship, it is not exclusive to a deity . . . are you daft?

I am not disputing their are different forms of worship, however you asserting that the use of the word 'worshipful' in Masonry somehow conotates worship is highly disengenious.

It has already been outlined that the 'devil' is not a supreme being therefore falling under the section of the definition 'great admiration or devotion shown towards a person or principle' or the verb 'feel great admiration or devotion for'.

Again, explain to me how worshiping another entity, other than God, makes you a monotheist.

In the Biblical understanding (as you have outlined for your thread) it was the 'devil' who tempted man to eat of the fruit of knowledge and become as gods. Become a better man, receive the light, knowledge, all fairly relevant to masonry.

I have not outlined any such thing about a being that I believe does not exist. This is your personal dogma regarding Satan and not mine. I do not share your superstitious belief in the Devil.

To believe that you need a fictitious entity to better yourself is laughable in its repressive and controlling absurdity.

Originally posted by Erbal
Why did the OP make the initial claim all Masons are required to have a belief in God but 40 pages later it changed into claiming all Masons are required to only worship God and all Masons are required to believe in the existence of only one God?

Worship of anything else preludes a monotheistic belief. I know this is a fairly simple concept and I am continually astounded by your repeated inability to wrap your brain around this.

What changed, the OP's truth or the OP's lies?

Funny, coming from the person who is guilty of blantant goal post shifting and even when his revised requests are made avoids commenting on said revised requests.

Originally posted by Erbal
That is suspiciously vague. Can you expand on that so it's clear what YOU are talking about?

Claiming to be a monotheist and then worshiping another entity other than God would nullify one's standing as a monotheist.

Is a fallen angel a God? If not, it would then be permitted for a Mason to believe in the existence of Lucifer AND worship him, as long as they still believe in the existence of at least one God to satisfy the theism requirement (or only one God if they are in the few jurisdictions that require monotheism).

Worship of anything other than God would prelcude somoene from being a monotheist.

Either Lucifer is a God or Lucifer is not a God... but you can't have it both ways with a double standard.

I do not believe Lucifer is even real but if he were he would be, as historically described, a fallen angel and therefore not a God.

Your link says it follows The Commission on Information for Recognition.
At the website for the source of the standards of recognition, they explicitly do NOT mention anything that can reasonably interpreted as monotheism.

www.recognitioncommission.org...
It's the link I have posted 10 times and you've ignored or dismissed 10 times.

The standards of recognition is just plain theism.

The standards that the Grand Lodge of Minnesota uses are listed in black and white on the page I quoted and it clearly has the word 'monotheism' included. Are you trying to tell me the Grand Lodge of Minnesota does not have this stipulation?

They follow the standards of recognition advocated by the Commission on Information of Recognition!
Here, I'll post the link again. Theism is currently the standard. All regular Grand Lodges are consistent with theism as the standard of recognition.

Again, the word 'monotheism' is clearly used on their page to define how the recognize other Grand Lodges in relation to themselves. Why do they use this word if it is not applicable? Why is it there if it is not a requirement?

You claimed that the 1956 standards are not in use except for one Grand Lodge. This has been thoroughly and completely disproved by the numerous citations I provided several pages back and is reinforced by the fact that the Grand Lodge of Minnesota used those standards to recognize another Grand Lodge in 2002.