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: 43
52
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

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.

Do you even know what PRELUDE means?

So you have no comment on the fact your claims have drastically changed from when you wrote the OP and now? You know, it looks like when you wrote the OP, you believed theism was the requirement... and when you were challenged you found a source you could pass off as proof monotheism is the requirements, and that is what you decided to run with. Too bad it's not currently true!




posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Do you even know what PRELUDE means?


Sorry, just saw the typo, it was supposed to say preclude.


So you have no comment on the fact your claims have drastically changed from when you wrote the OP and now? You know, it looks like when you wrote the OP, you believed theism was the requirement...


I was and am aware of the requirements in my home state and others that I have traveled to and corresponded with.


...and when you were challenged you found a source you could pass off as proof monotheism is the requirements, and that is what you decided to run with. Too bad it's not currently true!


'A' source? There you go again ignoring all the other ones I posted. And it was not 'passed off', it made it clear as day what the requirements for membership are.

How many more do you need?

And as for the truthfulness, Minnesota (among others) still employs it as evidenced by the recognition link I provided.



edit on 8-11-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

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.
You don't have to claim to be a monotheist to become a Mason!


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalIs 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.
What???? Why is that true?
You don't have a monopoly on the definition of monotheism... I have NEVER seen any dictionary or source define monotheism as being the worship of one God.

What makes YOU believe worship has anything to do with monotheism? And how do YOU define worship?
Did you make up your own language?


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalEither 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.
If Lucifer is not a God, EVERY SINGLE MASON, including the monotheists, can believe in him and worship him.

Are you telling me monotheist Masons can't believe in the existence of non-Gods? Are you telling me monotheist Masons can't respect, revere, and admire a non-God? They do it all the time, you cannot deny it without blatantly lying!

This is hitting a new record of ridiculous BS. Your lies are too much for you to keep up with.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalYour 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?
You are ignoring my point, completely.
The Grand Lodge's do not supersede the Standards of Recognition set out by the Commission on Standards of Recognition! If you want to be recognized as a regular Grand Lodge, you MUST satisfy the standards of recognition!

And I've shown a link about 15 times that the Standards of Recognition currently adopted by the commission are clear: THEISM, not monotheism, is the standard of recognition!

That doesn't mean a Grand Lodge can't go ABOVE the standard and require monotheism... it means they can't go below the standard and still be recognized.

If a Grand Lodge is currently recognized, it means they require theism.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalThey 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.
No. I claimed the current Standard of Recognition is a belief in God, and that is theism in general.

If the standard of recognition is a belief in ONLY one God, it would monotheism, which is a specific type of theism. Some Grand Lodges go above theism, a vast majority do not.

I never claimed only 1 lodge requires monotheism... I specifically said you only found 1 that requires monotheism and you found 20 more that do NOT require monotheism.

Stop lying. This thread needs to be shut down if all you are going to do is tell lies and use circular arguments to repeat your lies.
edit on 8-11-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-11-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Erbal
 


What the hell was all of that?

Monotheist = one God.

Masons absolutely MUST believe in one, ever-living creator.

Now, of course Masons can still believe in Satan, or Jesus, or Buddha, the Pink Unicorn, or anyone else as long as they don't think they are the creator of the Universe. There is only one creator of the Universe, and the name of that creator is not important. Any monotheistic religion would qualify, or a non-religious person that believes in one creator would qualify.

I haven't been following this thread very closely, not sure what all that was about, but it is an absolute must for a Mason to be monotheistic, but that does not rule out Jesus, or Satan, or anyone else.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Did you miss the part were it was stated that Lucifer (capitol L) is not found in the sacred texts but rather lucifer which means that it is not the name of the fallen angel? Lucifer (little l) is used as an allegory for the manifestation of the 'devil' a.k.a. its works, not as a name for the devil. You seem to be taking Dante and Milton as the official presentation of doctrine when they are nothing of the sort.

1. Devil does not rule in hell

2. Lucifer is only given the proper name by Dante and Milton as a being while the Church doctrine uses it as an allegory for the manifestations of the devil. It commonly used as a personification while the true meaning is that it was in reference to a king of Babylon who embodied the concept (and works) of the devil.

3. You already identified Jerome's translation as false and so to use it now as the name of the devil works heavily against your use of Lucifer as the name of the devil.

4. Your blatant misunderstanding (or possible misrepresentation) of the faith usurps any credibility you have in arguing that masonry cannot worship (L)ucifer.

5. (L)ucifer in the proper understanding as a king of Babylon and its astrotheology does have significant associations with modern masonry and historic masonic works which has been outlined in Washington D.C. (see David Ovason) and the writings of Albert Mackey, Albert Pike, Manly P. Hall and others.


On the great seal. Thompson included the eye of providence a widely used symbol of masonry and the pyramid another widely used symbol of masonry (especially at that moment in time) and followed the guidelines laid out by a mason and a man highly regarded by masonry. One does not have to be a mason to use their symbols to appeal to them when it is obvious how much influence the organization had surrounding the top levels of influence in America.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 

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

So if you are saying monotheism means you believe in one creator and it doesn't matter what 'lesser gods' you believe in... well, you are not using the standard and generally accepted definition of monotheism that I am using.

And the reason I am calling Augustus out on his lies is because for 30 pages I respectfully gave him the benefit of the doubt to prove his wild claims are true... and he chose to go down the road of blatant BS to a point I have no logical reason to assume he is not peppering this thread with lies.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
You don't have to claim to be a monotheist to become a Mason!


According to the multiple Grand Lodges I quoted you must.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
What???? Why is that true?
You don't have a monopoly on the definition of monotheism... I have NEVER seen any dictionary or source define monotheism as being the worship of one God.


The explain to me logically how you can be a monotheist and still worship multiple beings.


What makes YOU believe worship has anything to do with monotheism? And how do YOU define worship?
Did you make up your own language?


Again, explain to me how one can worship in a religious context more then one being and still be a monotheist.


If Lucifer is not a God, EVERY SINGLE MASON, including the monotheists, can believe in him and worship him.


And then how would you remain monotheistic?


Are you telling me monotheist Masons can't believe in the existence of non-Gods?


That is a rather stupid question. Any other entity besides God is non-God.


Are you telling me monotheist Masons can't respect, revere, and admire a non-God? They do it all the time, you cannot deny it without blatantly lying!


I respect and admire many people, this does not mean I worship them the same way I would God or as a god.


This is hitting a new record of ridiculous BS. Your lies are too much for you to keep up with.


You keep throwing out the comments 'lies' and 'bulls**t' when it is you who disengeniously avoids commenting on anything that disproves your point until reminded repeatedly to do so.


You are ignoring my point, completely.
The Grand Lodge's do not supersede the Standards of Recognition set out by the Commission on Standards of Recognition! If you want to be recognized as a regular Grand Lodge, you MUST satisfy the standards of recognition!


Hello! The Grand Lodges are the Commission. Do you think it is some nebulous non-Masonic entity that sets the rules? The Conference of Grand Masters appoints the membership based on a geographic rotation. All this does is further display your appalling ignorance on all things Masonic.


And I've shown a link about 15 times that the Standards of Recognition currently adopted by the commission are clear: THEISM, not monotheism, is the standard of recognition!


Tell that to all the other Grand Lodges I cited.


That doesn't mean a Grand Lodge can't go ABOVE the standard and require monotheism... it means they can't go below the standard and still be recognized.

If a Grand Lodge is currently recognized, it means they require theism.


Wrong. As I have previously showed any Grand Lodge in amity with Minnesota, New Hampshire, etc has to meet their standards. And their standards were made very clear to you.


No. I claimed the current Standard of Recognition is a belief in God, and that is theism in general.

If the standard of recognition is a belief in ONLY one God, it would monotheism, which is a specific type of theism. Some Grand Lodges go above theism, a vast majority do not.


Prove that the vast majority do not. You are giving your opinion only. I have responded with verifiable links.


I never claimed only 1 lodge requires monotheism... I specifically said you only found 1 that requires monotheism and you found 20 more that do NOT require monotheism.


Besides the ones that clearly mention it you have chosen to discount the ones the make clear that Masonry 'teaches monothesim'. How do you teach monotheism to the non-montheist?


This thread needs to be shut down if all you are going to do is tell lies and use circular arguments to repeat your lies.


Hit the alert button if you think this thread is a probelm, otherwise stop crying.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
Did you miss the part were it was stated that Lucifer (capitol L) is not found in the sacred texts but rather lucifer which means that it is not the name of the fallen angel? Lucifer (little l) is used as an allegory for the manifestation of the 'devil' a.k.a. its works, not as a name for the devil. You seem to be taking Dante and Milton as the official presentation of doctrine when they are nothing of the sort.


Uh, no. The 'official presentation' was a mistranslation by Jerome as I stated in the Original Post:


Lucifer
(Hebrew helel; Septuagint heosphoros, Vulgate lucifer)

The name Lucifer originally denotes the planet Venus, emphasizing its brilliance. The Vulgate employs the word also for "the light of the morning" (Job 11:17), "the signs of the zodiac" (Job 38:32), and "the aurora" (Psalm 109:3). Metaphorically, the word is applied to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) as preeminent among the princes of his time; to the high priest Simon son of Onias (Ecclesiasticus 50:6), for his surpassing virtue, to the glory of heaven (Apocalypse 2:28), by reason of its excellency; finally to Jesus Christ himself (2 Peter 1:19; Apocalypse 22:16; the "Exultet" of Holy Saturday) the true light of our spiritual life.

The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, "to lament"; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1.14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4). Source



1. Devil does not rule in hell


As far as I am concerend he rules nowhere as he is fictitious. However, the misconeption, which persists to this day among many is that he rules in Hell.


2. Lucifer is only given the proper name by Dante and Milton as a being while the Church doctrine uses it as an allegory for the manifestations of the devil. It commonly used as a personification while the true meaning is that it was in reference to a king of Babylon who embodied the concept (and works) of the devil.


See above, Jerome's mistranslation of the Septuagint is the root of the confusion.


3. You already identified Jerome's translation as false and so to use it now as the name of the devil works heavily against your use of Lucifer as the name of the devil.


I identified Jerome's mistranslation since the Original Post. I only use the word Lucifer because it has become, over a long period of time, synonymous with Satan. This is fairly obvious to anyone who has read this thread closely.


4. Your blatant misunderstanding (or possible misrepresentation) of the faith usurps any credibility you have in arguing that masonry cannot worship (L)ucifer.


Considering I was raised 'in the faith' that would be hard to do. The fact that Roman Catholocism was promoting such concepts as Hell and Satan was the reason I found it intellectually incompatible with myself.


5. (L)ucifer in the proper understanding as a king of Babylon and its astrotheology does have significant associations with modern masonry and historic masonic works which has been outlined in Washington D.C. (see David Ovason) and the writings of Albert Mackey, Albert Pike, Manly P. Hall and others.


List them. With verifiable source.


On the great seal. Thompson included the eye of providence a widely used symbol of masonry and the pyramid another widely used symbol of masonry (especially at that moment in time) and followed the guidelines laid out by a mason and a man highly regarded by masonry. One does not have to be a mason to use their symbols to appeal to them when it is obvious how much influence the organization had surrounding the top levels of influence in America.


Thompson (sic) used the Eye of Providence (a Christian symbol) because it represented Deity and not because it had a Masonic conotation. His notes are still available in the National Archives for review. The pyramid does not appear anywhere in Masonic ritual let alone an unfinished one.

The rest of your comment is irrelevant. The majority of the Founders were not Masons including Thomson who designed the Seal with minimal input. It is comical to try an watch you rewrite history to suit your agenda.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Erbal
 


In my opinion, a lesser god is not a god at all. So to me, a single creator, means a single god, and all those other entities are not gods. Not Jesus, not Satan, not Lucifer, not Buddha, etc. So that part is just semantics. I interpret my obligation such that I believe in one, ever-living creator, and we often call that creator GAOTU, but sometimes just God, sometimes Heavenly Father, and for people from other languages and cultures, sometimes Allah, or sometimes Vishnu, or sometimes the Sky God, or whatever else people can come up with, but it is all the same, singular creator.

As far as I know, Buddhists do not worship Buddha, or consider him a god, he is merely god-like after his enlightment, but the pervading spirit is the god, not the Buddha. I could be wrong, that's my layman interpretation.

As far as I'm concerned, those who worship Jesus, or Satan, or any other lesser entity are not worshipping God, In fact, I think it is sinful to pray to the lesser gods or saints. Praying to St. Peter, or Mother Mary, or even Jesus Christ seems wrong to me, but to each their own.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Erbal
You don't have to claim to be a monotheist to become a Mason!


According to the multiple Grand Lodges I quoted you must.
Unless every single Grand Lodge requires you to claim to be a monotheist, it is true that you do not have to claim to be a monotheist to become a Mason.


The explain to me logically how you can be a monotheist and still worship multiple beings.
It's pretty simple: theism and monotheism do NOT require worship, only belief!


Again, explain to me how one can worship in a religious context more then one being and still be a monotheist.
I asked you to give your definition of worship in general and you deflect by asking me about worship in a religious context? You can worship whatever you like, however you like, but the moment you believe in the existence of more than one deity is the moment you are no longer a monotheist by definition.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalIf Lucifer is not a God, EVERY SINGLE MASON, including the monotheists, can believe in him and worship him.


And then how would you remain monotheistic?
If a monotheist doesn't consider Lucifer a God, why couldn't that monotheist believe Lucifer exists?


I respect and admire many people, this does not mean I worship them the same way I would God or as a god.
Ahhh, so you agree a monotheist CAN worship a non-God after all.


You keep throwing out the comments 'lies' and 'bulls**t' when it is you who disengeniously avoids commenting on anything that disproves your point until reminded repeatedly to do so.
You keep bringing up the same stuff exact that has already been discussed and refuted more times than I can keep track of... I'm not trying to follow all of your circular arguments to the bitter end.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalYou are ignoring my point, completely.
The Grand Lodge's do not supersede the Standards of Recognition set out by the Commission on Standards of Recognition! If you want to be recognized as a regular Grand Lodge, you MUST satisfy the standards of recognition!


Hello! The Grand Lodges are the Commission. Do you think it is some nebulous non-Masonic entity that sets the rules? The Conference of Grand Masters appoints the membership based on a geographic rotation. All this does is further display your appalling ignorance on all things Masonic.
A total of 6 Master Masons make up the Commission that decides the recognition standards for all of Canada, USA, Mexico, DC, and Puerto Rico. In what way does that mean the Grand Lodges of these areas are the Commission itself?


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalAnd I've shown a link about 15 times that the Standards of Recognition currently adopted by the commission are clear: THEISM, not monotheism, is the standard of recognition!


Tell that to all the other Grand Lodges I cited.
Why? Grand Lodges have the sovereignty to require monotheism without risk of losing their recognition because monotheism is in compliance with the standard that is "a belief in God."


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by ErbalThat doesn't mean a Grand Lodge can't go ABOVE the standard and require monotheism... it means they can't go below the standard and still be recognized.

If a Grand Lodge is currently recognized, it means they require theism.

Wrong. As I have previously showed any Grand Lodge in amity with Minnesota, New Hampshire, etc has to meet their standards. And their standards were made very clear to you.
Oh I remember you asserting this as true, I don't remember you PROVING IT IS TRUE.
But hey, if you did it once it should be easy for you to repeat it for clarity... we all know you don't mind repeating yourself over and over.


Prove that the vast majority do not. You are giving your opinion only. I have responded with verifiable links.
Let's agree on a burden of proof.
I have already proven the Standards for Recognition are simply a belief in God, aka theism.
We know all lodges are consistent with the standards and some lodges do use explicit monotheism wording.

I propose any Grand Lodge which does not explicitly state they require monotheism, or a believe in ONLY one God (only being a key word). will be marked as a Lodge which does not specifically require monotheism. OK?


Besides the ones that clearly mention it you have chosen to discount the ones the make clear that Masonry 'teaches monothesim'. How do you teach monotheism to the non-montheist?
Prove they actually TEACH monotheism to a degree that only monotheists, and not theists, could endure.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 

Am I wrong is assuming you feel a belief in a god does not inherently involve the worship of said god? That theism and worship are 2 distinctly different concepts despite any connection and similarities between them?

If that is how you feel, I couldn't agree more.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
reply to post by darkhorserider
 

Am I wrong is assuming you feel a belief in a god does not inherently involve the worship of said god? That theism and worship are 2 distinctly different concepts despite any connection and similarities between them?

If that is how you feel, I couldn't agree more.



You are right on the money. I don't see how any supreme being could garner any thrill out of our worship. My dog annoys the hell out of me when it worships me, LOL!

The existence of said creator, and the intersection and interaction between us and that creator here on Earth are evident to me, but I don't believe there is a control mechanism, or a direct influence of the creator in day to day actions on Earth. I do believe in prayer and meditation, but I do not believe in worship.
edit on 8-11-2012 by darkhorserider because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 

So what are you opinions about this thread and the OP's claims?



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
reply to post by darkhorserider
 

So what are you opinions about this thread and the OP's claims?


I haven't read all 40+ pages, and I'm not nearly as well-versed in the History side as you and Augustus, but my opinion as a Mason is that a Luciferian or even a Satanist could easily qualify to receive the 3 degrees of Masonry, but there is not, and can not be anything in Masonry requiring someone to worship any particular god.

There is no, and could be no secret agenda to trick Masons into worshipping any particular God.

SO, on the whole, knowing the Masons I know, I agree that Masons do not worship Lucifer or Satan, but that does not mean there aren't a few stragglers that do so on their own, or that there have never been any that did it in the past.

For Freemasonry, the name of the god is not important. We intentionally use generic designations like GAOTU to make it more non-denominational. Most lodges in the US use a Holy Bible on their altar, but I've seen tha Quran, and the Torah displayed as well. I've even seen the Epic of Gilgamesh displayed in a Shriner's Temple. An initiate can request a different Holy Book if they so desire, there is nothing wrong with asking. I suppose someone could even request a Luciferian Bible, and the members would gasp, and some would object, but in the core concepts of Masonry, I don't see how it would violate any of our principles to allow it.

Masonry is most certainly not a Satanic organization, but neither is it a Christian Organization.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 


Thanks for your input and honesty.

I have said from the start that I strongly believe none of us are in a position to say what ALL Masons do or do not believe in and/or worship. This works both ways, it must work both ways, and claiming ALL Masons do not worship Lucifer is no exception. It's why I am so skeptical of the OP's claims.

I'd like to make it clear that this thread isn't about proving or disproving that Masonry does or does not "trick" people into worshiping lucifer/satan, or things of that nature. That is a whole other can of worms this thread has steered clear of.

This thread is about whether or not a Mason will violate the rules, requirements, and regulations of Masonry when/if they chose to worship Lucifer, or engaging in Luciferianism. And for that to be settled we must establish what the rules of regular Freemasonry actually are (obviously we are not concerned with irregular Masonry as no one is disputing whether or not those guys are free to worship Lucifer). The bulk of this thread has been predominately devoted to establishing what the rules are... and it's been a very convoluted 40+ pages that has slowly inched forward.

One of the big hurdles has been some of the ridiculous premises that Augustus has asserted as the only way to see things. Also, he has engaged in an overwhelming amount of deceptive tactics - like manipulating other peoples words, manipulating the facts of this thread, moving the goal posts in different ways for both sides, asserting obscure definitions are the standard and generally accepted definitions, ignoring anything which doesn't fit his agenda, ad hominem attacks when you disagree, and much more.

At which point is it reasonable to call someone out for lies and deception? I think we passed that point for Augustus a long time ago, and I was more than generous to give him as much time as I did to demonstrate the validity and accuracy of his claims before I became vocal in calling his BS as actually being BS.
edit on 8-11-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-11-2012 by Erbal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Oh dear God . . .

This from your own source: www.newadvent.org...


In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).


You seem to have misread the passage. The part which denotes (L)ucifer is NOT what is accepted. There is a period at the end of that sentence before the official tradition is declared.



The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, "to lament"; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1.14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star.


The official presentation is NOT Jerome's translation. It does not matter if you were raised 'in the faith' as you continue to argue what the official beliefs are and are proven wrong on every point. This is getting incredibly ridiculous. Who ever raised you 'in the faith' seems to have merely fed you constant BS from Hollywood.

I have already provided you with quotes from these sources detailing the connection to the mysteries of old, this argument is becoming circular as you continually fall flat on your face.

David Ovason clearly outlines the astrological implications of the building of Washington D.C. and the incredible masonic influence and overseeing of said city. If you want me to comb through the book and provide you with pages and pages of masons and the buildings I would violate the T&C on copyright and posting from other sources.

Mackey, Pike, and Hall have all been quoted from thoroughly enough for you unless you want to waste pages and pages to repeat them all over again.

For the connection in temple alignments one must recognize the ancient religions were the mysteries and so the temples built by them follow their beliefs. Pyramids at Giza aligned with Orion (do I really need to provide a source for you here?).

Karnak:
www.kch42.dial.pipex.com...

Teotihuacan: Pyramids of the Sun and the Moon
www.metmuseum.org...

Greek Temples:
www.academia.edu...


And to your comment that the majority of the founders were not masons you are correct by they represent one of if not the largest single bodies outside of American and soldier. The pyramid was appear on masonic aprons and regalia at the time so arguing it as not masonic, when Franklin and Jefferson (not mason - respected among masons) told him to combine Christian and Egyptian symbols which was a popular trend among masons of the time, is not a genuine debunk of the 'coincidence' between the two.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Erbal
 


I respect Augustus very much, and I'm not very well versed on Luciferianism, but from my cursory knowledge, I'd say I'm probably closer to that than I am Christianity. From what I know, it is very similar in morals to Christianity, but it views the Lucifer character as someone who stood up for the rights of mankind and refused to bow to the will of God. I don't believe in the saving grace of Jesus Christ, and I do believe in the power of mankind, so I think that probably puts me just over the edge.

If you take all the semantics out of it, and all of the character names, and just look at the morals and lessons, I believe I would probably fall closer to the Lucifer side than the Christian side, but I would never worship Lucifer, just like I will never worship any other lesser character or pseudo-god.

I think a Luciferian would fit very well within the principles of Masonry, as long as they don't think Lucifer is the creator of the Universe, but I don't think one would be very popular in a Lodge. In fact, I doubt they would ever get in, if people were aware of their beliefs, they would probably get blackballed.

I do hold the GAOTU in the utmost reveration, and I do make every attempt to listen to the subtle whisperings that come during prayer and meditation, and I attempt to do everything I was put here to do, and experience everything that is brought before me without question, and without regret or fear.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Erbal
Unless every single Grand Lodge requires you to claim to be a monotheist, it is true that you do not have to claim to be a monotheist to become a Mason.


We seem to be heading down the road of you will not be satisfied until I post a link from every Grand Lodge with the word 'monotheism' included.


It's pretty simple: theism and monotheism do NOT require worship, only belief!


And if you claim to be monotheistic and worship other beings what are you?


I asked you to give your definition of worship in general and you deflect by asking me about worship in a religious context? You can worship whatever you like, however you like, but the moment you believe in the existence of more than one deity is the moment you are no longer a monotheist by definition.


Which has been my point. Belief in more than one God, which you would have to have if you worshipped more than one being, would preclude membership.


If a monotheist doesn't consider Lucifer a God, why couldn't that monotheist believe Lucifer exists?


They could believe that Lucifer exists but would by defintion of monotheism not be able to worship said being.


Ahhh, so you agree a monotheist CAN worship a non-God after all.


Not in a religious sense. More in a metaphorical way, as in 'hero worship' or 'worshipping the ground someone walks on'. These are obviously NOT what we are discussing and are irrelevant to the topic so I do not see why you continue to tread this path.


You keep bringing up the same stuff exact that has already been discussed and refuted more times than I can keep track of... I'm not trying to follow all of your circular arguments to the bitter end.


No one is compelling you to do anything, post or do not post, it makes zero difference to me either way.


A total of 6 Master Masons make up the Commission that decides the recognition standards for all of Canada, USA, Mexico, DC, and Puerto Rico. In what way does that mean the Grand Lodges of these areas are the Commission itself?


Because the Grand Masters of each jursidiction appoint members on a rotating basis, the membership is reflective of the Grand Lodges themselves from which they are drawn and are typically all Past Grand Masters themselves.


And I've shown a link about 15 times that the Standards of Recognition currently adopted by the commission are clear: THEISM, not monotheism, is the standard of recognition!


And I showed you correspondence that explained belief in ONE God was the interpretation.


Why? Grand Lodges have the sovereignty to require monotheism without risk of losing their recognition because monotheism is in compliance with the standard that is "a belief in God."


I have shown the numerous Grand Lodge's recognition standards require monotheism. These Grand Lodges are in mutual amity with ALL the other Grand Lodges which means that each of those Grand Lodges has done their due diligence and deteremined that the Lodges that they chose to recognize are in compliance with THEIR standards. You do not list a requirement for recognition only to ignore it.


Oh I remember you asserting this as true, I don't remember you PROVING IT IS TRUE.
But hey, if you did it once it should be easy for you to repeat it for clarity... we all know you don't mind repeating yourself over and over.


The above statement, as exlained ad nauseum, proves the point. Exlpain why a Grand Lodge would set aside its own standard of recognition when considering another Grand Lodge?


Let's agree on a burden of proof.
I have already proven the Standards for Recognition are simply a belief in God, aka theism.
We know all lodges are consistent with the standards and some lodges do use explicit monotheism wording.


This is a logical fallacy as abscence of evidence does not equate to evidence of abscence. Just because each Grand Lodge does not post, or posts differently the recognition standards does not mean they are in observance of the 1956 agreement. In case you have not noticed their has been no revised publication of the Landmarks that contradicts the 1956 agreement. Do you know why? Because they have not been revised.


I propose any Grand Lodge which does not explicitly state they require monotheism, or a believe in ONLY one God (only being a key word). will be marked as a Lodge which does not specifically require monotheism. OK?


I do not agree because you discounted every link I posted where Grand Lodges clearly stated that they teach monotheism. Why would you teach something as standard ritual when you admit people who do not adhere to this principle?


Prove they actually TEACH monotheism to a degree that only monotheists, and not theists, could endure.


The references in the ritual to God. An example would be where we explain 'the ONE everliving and true God'. Not 'God and a bunch of other stuff'.



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkhorserider
I respect Augustus very much, and I'm not very well versed on Luciferianism, but from my cursory knowledge, I'd say I'm probably closer to that than I am Christianity. From what I know, it is very similar in morals to Christianity, but it views the Lucifer character as someone who stood up for the rights of mankind and refused to bow to the will of God.


Thank you.

The issue with this is Luciferians do not actually believe Lucifer is either:

1) Real

2) and/or God

And as for 'Luciferian Bible' I would like to see one that posits Lucifer as God as they typically ascribe faith to both Lucifer and Lilith which would preclude membership as neither one is Supreme.


I think a Luciferian would fit very well within the principles of Masonry, as long as they don't think Lucifer is the creator of the Universe...


They would have to think Lucifer was the Creator of the Universe to 'fit very well'. They could not get in without professing belief in a Supreme Being. That is the point of this whole thread. If you cannot believe the Historical Lucifer (Satan) is Supreme because Satan was created by God.

If you believe that Lucifer created the Universe then you are really just calling God by a different name that you chose to give to God. This however is not the definition of a Luciferian.






edit on 8-11-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude is a real Luciferian



posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FriedBabelBroccoli
In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).


Holy mackerel. I know Lucifer is not the proper name for the Devil. How many times do I have to say this was a mistranslation?


The official presentation is NOT Jerome's translation. It does not matter if you were raised 'in the faith' as you continue to argue what the official beliefs are and are proven wrong on every point. This is getting incredibly ridiculous. Who ever raised you 'in the faith' seems to have merely fed you constant BS from Hollywood.


The link I provided clearly shows that Jerome was mistaken.


David Ovason clearly outlines the astrological implications of the building of Washington D.C. and the incredible masonic influence and overseeing of said city. If you want me to comb through the book and provide you with pages and pages of masons and the buildings I would violate the T&C on copyright and posting from other sources.


What do 'astrological implications' have to do with the Original Post or the Great Seal?


Mackey, Pike, and Hall have all been quoted from thoroughly enough for you unless you want to waste pages and pages to repeat them all over again.


I want you to quote them because I have a distinct feeling you are going to quote rehashed hoaxes or out of context quotes.


For the connection in temple alignments one must recognize the ancient religions were the mysteries and so the temples built by them follow their beliefs. Pyramids at Giza aligned with Orion (do I really need to provide a source for you here?).


Again, what does this have to do with the Original Post or the Great Seal?


And to your comment that the majority of the founders were not masons you are correct by they represent one of if not the largest single bodies outside of American and soldier. The pyramid was appear on masonic aprons and regalia at the time so arguing it as not masonic, when Franklin and Jefferson (not mason - respected among masons) told him to combine Christian and Egyptian symbols which was a popular trend among masons of the time, is not a genuine debunk of the 'coincidence' between the two.


They 'told' him? Really? This is not bourne out by his notes and you obviously did not realize that there were 2 other committees after Jefferson and Franklin's that added much more relative symbolism and none of it was from Masons.



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 40  41  42    44  45  46 >>

log in

join