Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

page: 54
38
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 06:53 PM
link   
If he is indeed a Mason he warrants expulsion for his comments regarding jurisdiction. They are rather un-Masonic.

Additionally I have not seen him post his exact beliefs here so I am withholding comment until he does.


Funny that you think everyone else should be expulsed, but do not see anything wrong with your actions. You are what is wrong with Masonry. It's ridiculous that you think that because of your jurisdiction you are somehow a better Mason than someone else. Or that you are so stuck on your religious beliefs that you would denigrate someone else's. This is really revealing in regards to your ego. I think by asserting your pseudo authority in this forum for the whole world to see is very telling. I see nothing wrong with his comment those who are awake have nothing to do with the jurisdiction they belong to in Masonry. I think honestly you are one whose Un-Masonic here.
edit on 18-11-2012 by ExuLucifer because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 18 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
Lucifer is my King, he gave the gift of knowledge...he is one of 3 thru kings who fall under one true God. The "gods" of modern belief are not the "Creators" of the universe but merely rulers of one realm....and the catnips are plenty

Sipus Maxus Tipus
edit on 18-11-2012 by EnkiTheKing because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Lucifer is my King, he gave the gift of knowledge...he is one of 3 thru kings who fall under one true God. The "gods" of modern belief are not the "Creators" of the universe but merely rulers of one realm....and the catnips are plenty

Damn somebody just got sunned



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by EnkiTheKing
Lucifer is my King, he gave the gift of knowledge...he is one of 3 thru kings who fall under one true God. The "gods" of modern belief are not the "Creators" of the universe but merely rulers of one realm....and the catnips are plenty

Sipus Maxus Tipus
edit on 18-11-2012 by EnkiTheKing because: (no reason given)


This could work for a Mason. I don't see any problem with that belief whatsoever. Still have a problem with the idea of you refusing to submit to the laws of your jurisdiction, but this particular religious belief sounds exactly like Christianity with a minor character change.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 


The beef with jurisdiction wasn't abiding by its rules and regs. It was with a jurisdiction being a majority of one religious belief influencing your views in masonry and life in general. I believe one can be in a majority christian jurisdiction and still be open minded about the universe. I don't feel anyone has to withhold their beliefs or ideas from the lodge just because of the W.'.M.'. or majority of brothers being one religious majority. I do believe a religious majority in a lodge does effect the ideas of masonry on new initiates which is dangerous (in my opinion)



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by EnkiTheKing
 


I agree there is a strong Christian bias in Masonry in most Lodges, but I don't believe it is a negative thing. However, if I believed the same as you believe, my experience would likely be different and perhaps I would agree with you. I have a feeling your religious views are not accepted well in the Lodge, and that is a shame. As long as you believe in the one, ever-living creator, then your views should be welcome, but religion is a funny thing, people get really cuckoo about their religion.

I don't know enough about your religion to formulate and educated opinion, but I feel the Christian religion has just as many shortcomings as your religion or any other popular religion. People have a hard time differentiating between the one Creator and all of the subsequent prophets, leaders, and founders of the religions that followed.

Just this very weekend I was considering scheduling a baptism for myself, but I don't want to accept Christ as my savior or join a church, I just want to have the experience like John the Baptist provided and like Jesus himself would have had. There is no reason a preacher could not perform such a service, but very few of them are willing to do so, and I believe the reason is they don't understand their own religion adequately enough.

Still, your strongpoint is that you are not violating any of the laws or regulations governing Freemasonry with your beliefs. You need to stick with that, and not say that you won't submit to the laws of your jurisdiction. If you want to be a voluntary member of the jurisdiction, then you necessarily must follow the governing body. Stick with the argument that you are indeed following the those laws, and it is the other brothers that are violating their obligations by being partial to one religion over another.



posted on Nov, 19 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by darkhorserider
 



If you actually take to the time to actually read what he wrote he never said anything about this so called assertion of breaking laws.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


The devil or Satan are not new testament concepts.The devil is mentioned from Genesis to revelations and also in Jewish and Islamic texts.



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
reply to post by ExuLucifer
 


I'm probably the only guy here anywhere near understanding or defending you or Enki, but let's not be dishonest or sugarcoat things. He said what he said.


Fuk jurisdictions, they mean nothing.



I'm not bound by what a "jusidiction" wants.


I can't see several of his other posts that were removed, but he did indeed say he wasn't bound by the laws of his jurisdiction, even though he voluntarily took an obligation that says otherwise. So is he an honorable man of his word or not? Did he lie at the obligation, or lie in this thread?



posted on Nov, 20 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I can't see several of his other posts that were removed, but he did indeed say he wasn't bound by the laws of his jurisdiction, even though he voluntarily took an obligation that says otherwise. So is he an honorable man of his word or not? Did he lie at the obligation, or lie in this thread?


No one ever is bound by a jurisdiction when you realize where you first made a Mason. You are caught up in the politics of jurisdiction of the external.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ExuLucifer
So being a freethinker makes one liable for expulsion for not 1000% believing everything that one is told in regard to Masonry?


Free thought has nothing to do with this. It has everything to do with following the doctrines and policy that you agree to follow.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ExuLucifer
Funny that you think everyone else should be expulsed, but do not see anything wrong with your actions. You are what is wrong with Masonry. It's ridiculous that you think that because of your jurisdiction you are somehow a better Mason than someone else.


I never said that I am better then anyone else. Only that this alleged Mason has no regard for jurisdiction which, by the obligations he personally would have taken, warrants his expulsion.


Or that you are so stuck on your religious beliefs that you would denigrate someone else's. This is really revealing in regards to your ego.


I could care less about his, yours or anyone else's religious beliefs.


I see nothing wrong with his comment those who are awake have nothing to do with the jurisdiction they belong to in Masonry.


How can you be a regular Masons and 'have nothing to do with the jurisdiction the belong to in Masonry'? That is a logical fallacy of epic proportions.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by hymey
The devil or Satan are not new testament concepts.The devil is mentioned from Genesis to revelations and also in Jewish and Islamic texts.


Please go back and reread the thread from the beginning, you obviously missed a good portion of its contents.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Free thought has nothing to do with this. It has everything to do with following the doctrines and policy that you agree to follow.

Obviously it does have to do with freethought. You have not shown he does not not follow doctrines or policy. You are merely spun up that he has exhibitied free thought and shown quite rightly that jurisdiction has nothing with being awake.



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
I never said that I am better then anyone else. Only that this alleged Mason has no regard for jurisdiction which, by the obligations he personally would have taken, warrants his expulsion.

lol @ alleged Mason. He does not warrant his expulsion his words showed like mine you are caught up in politics of jurisdiction like a sheep.

I could care less about his, yours or anyone else's religious beliefs.

Right which is why you made this thread which was proved to be inherently false.


How can you be a regular Masons and 'have nothing to do with the jurisdiction the belong to in Masonry'? That is a logical fallacy of epic proportions.

No it is not. You are either intentionally obfuscating with your continued line of reasoning or you are not an adept as you presume and pretend, and you should go sit in the corner with a dunce cap.
edit on 22-11-2012 by ExuLucifer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Be thankful for the serpent, for the lie belches light.



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 

I'm still waiting for hymey to respond to my posts, but I doubt you'll get anything. Probably just a drive-by troll post.

reply to post by ExuLucifer
 

So you're a relativist?



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
If you know what you get into in masonry or not, doesn't matter. You are entering into a area where "a god" is mentioned and referred to as the creator. That is what the plan is, if you want it or not. The plan is to get you from Jesus Christ Of Nazaret as God to "a god". This "a god' is described by Albert Pike as Lucifer. This concludes that if you accept the principle of " a god" you are at great risk to accept any other god in place of Jesus.



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pike65
This concludes that if you accept the principle of " a god" you are at great risk to accept any other god in place of Jesus.
And just how many omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent Gods do you think are wandering around out there? I can only think of one—the same one who said "Let there be light."



posted on Nov, 23 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExuLucifer
You have not shown he does not not follow doctrines or policy.


When he posted 'f*k jurisdiction' he displayed a disregard for his obligation. End of story.





new topics
top topics
 
38
<< 51  52  53    55  56  57 >>

log in

join