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: 62
53
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   

freedom7

Isaiah 14:12-14 how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.




Now read it again in context, including the few verses before it.
That line is part of an address to the King of Babylon:

Isaiah 14:4 "That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say...

[...]

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!"




edit on 10/1/2014 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Saurus
 


I am afraid we are going to have to remove your post. It's just not fair allowing "CONTEXT" to come into play in this forum. It's very roots have been formed on out of context Pike quotes.


Perhaps in the future, you will be more mindful of these rules.



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   

freedom7
Isaiah 14:12-14 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.


The old Testament clearly identifies the adversary on many occasions, this is just one example. What about the story of the serpent in the garden of eden? Isn't that what you could call making the enemy known right off the bat?


What does this passage look like in the languages the Bible was originally written in? You are quoting the mistranslated, Anglicized version which does not communicate the original meaning of this parable. It is obvious that you have not read much, or any, of this thread as this part of Isaiah was discussed in depth. The passage is not referring to a fallen angel but to a king of Babylon.

The serpent was also addressed and in the original languages the words 'ha-satan' (adversary) were not used to describe the serpent in the Garden.

Please explain why your contemporary version of the Bible, with its plethora of mistranslations, should take precedent over the original language and meaning of the stories?



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 09:57 AM
link   
While I agree with you that translations can change the entire meaning of a passage/ story. There seems to be a consensus among scholars that the Old Testament was written in "Hebrew" , and that The Bible as a whole was actually written in three different ancient languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Would you agree with this? If so , please list why not. I'm always open to learning more, and keeping an open mind about all of this, the bible is a very mysterious book.


When you say that verse in Isaiah was actually in reference to the King of Babylon, and not a fallen angel. I cannot deny you may have a valid point, however that being said is it not true that large amount of the bible is written in parables/ stories that hint to a deeper meaning? Jesus almost spoke exclusively in parables to connect ideas of deeper significance .


is it not possible to consider that the King of Babylon is being used symbolically here in a story to convey the deeper meaning behind just how evil the Devil really is?



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 10:04 AM
link   

freedom7
While I agree with you that translations can change the entire meaning of a passage/ story. There seems to be a consensus among scholars that the Old Testament was written in "Hebrew" , and that The Bible as a whole was actually written in three different ancient languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Would you agree with this? If so , please list why not. I'm always open to learning more, and keeping an open mind about all of this, the bible is a very mysterious book.


No one is disputing that.


When you say that verse in Isaiah was actually in reference to the King of Babylon, and not a fallen angel. I cannot deny you may have a valid point, however that being said is it not true that large amount of the bible is written in parables/ stories that hint to a deeper meaning? Jesus almost spoke exclusively in parables to connect ideas of deeper significance .


The fact that Jesus may or may not have spoken in parables would be irrelevant to the Isaiah passage in question as it predates Jesus by many centuries and was written be a different author who may or may not have been writing this parabolically. From the original language it does not appear to have a deeper meaning, additionally, why would the Biblical Hebrews be writing about a fallen angel when they did not even believe in the concept?



is it not possible to consider that the King of Babylon is being used symbolically here in a story to convey the deeper meaning behind just how evil the Devil really is?


The Hebrews did not believe in a devil. This is a Christian concept.



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
The Hebrews did not believe in a devil. This is a Christian concept.


- You are probably more educated than me on the history of the bible. I still have so much to learn. Just so I can research this topic further, can you please state your facts behind why you believe the Hebrews did not believe in the devil, and how it's strictly a Christian concept.

You may be right, I'm not disputing this, because I do believe even the concept of Hell and it's true meaning became very different from the old testament to the new testament , so there could be a pattern here.

I'm interested to hear back from you



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   

freedom7
- You are probably more educated than me on the history of the bible. I still have so much to learn. Just so I can research this topic further, can you please state your facts behind why you believe the Hebrews did not believe in the devil, and how it's strictly a Christian concept.


There are numerous links in the thread which cite various sources and scholars that explain that the concept of Satan/Lucifer/The Devil was not one that Biblical (or modern Jews) believed. If you have a hard time locating them I can try and track some down for you.


You may be right, I'm not disputing this, because I do believe even the concept of Hell and it's true meaning became very different from the old testament to the new testament , so there could be a pattern here.

I'm interested to hear back from you


Interestingly enough the Hebrews also did not believe in a concept of Hell as this too is purely a Christian concoction.



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Thanks for the reply Masonicus! I will search through the thread and do my research



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   

freedom7
Thanks for the reply Masonicus! I will search through the thread and do my research


I am aware that this is a very long thread so I thought I would help you locate some relative information and links:

Here is Orthodox Rabbi Ari Shishler on the topic:


The one and only time that Satan is mentioned in the "Five books of Moses" is as a VERB.

It's part of the story of Balaam, who was hired to curse the Jews. En route, he gets blocked by an angel, whom G-d sent [this doesn't work as well in English as in Hebrew:] "to Satan him". In other words, Satan means to hinder or mislead.

In Hebrew an "S" and an "SH" are often represented by the same letter. So, the term Satan is also related to the Hebrew term Shtut, which means foolishness.

The Talmud teaches that a person only "sins" when a "spirit of foolishness" enters them. If a person was always rational, he/she would always do the right things. So "Satan" is the internal foolishness that gets us to do wrong- and then to defend our misbehavior. (In classical Jewish terms, we call this the "Evil inclination".)

We do encounter references later in the Bible to a "Satan" (like at the beginning of the book of Job). This is the angel that G-d created to act as the Accusing Voice in Heaven. So, when a person (whether alive or dead) is judged in Heaven, Satan has the job of digging up the dirt on them.

One thing is very clear in Judaism- Satan, the angel, is a CREATED entity. Like any other angel, he can only act in accordance with G-d's will.

Basically, Satan's got a dirty job, but someone's got to do it.


From Judaism 101:


The information in this site is written predominantly from the Orthodox viewpoint, because I believe that is a good starting point for any inquiry into Judaism:

....

The yetzer ra is generally seen as something internal to a person, not as an external force acting on a person. The idea that "the devil made me do it" is not in line with the majority of thought in Judaism. Although it has been said that Satan and the yetzer ra are one and the same, this is more often understood as meaning that Satan is merely a personification of our own selfish desires, rather than that our selfish desires are caused by some external force.


More from Rabbi Shishler:


There is no question that there will be no evil when Moshiach comes (see Zechariah 13), Satan included. The notion of throwing an angel into Hell is odd. Angels are not only beings without a yetzer hara, but they have are actually just bursts of G-d's energy and can never separate from Him, let alone be punished.



Frankly, it's ridiculous to debate further because you clearly haven't read any Orthodox Jewish sources.


The comments of Rambam:


Rambam's Moreh Nevuchim Book III, chap. 22 discussing sefer Iyove

"...the Talmud says as follows: "Rebbe Shimeon ben Lakish, says: "The adversary (satan), evil inclination (yezer ha-ra'), and the angel of death, are one and the same being." Here we find all that has been mentioned by us in such a dear manner that no intelligent person will be in doubt about it. It has thus been shown to you that one and the same thing is designated by these three different terms, and that actions ascribed to these three are in reality the actions of one and thesame agent. Again, the ancient doctors of the Talmud said: "The adversary (satan) goes about and misleads, then he goes up and accuses, obtains permission, and takes the soul." You have already beentold that when David at the time of the plague was shown the angel" with the sword drawn in his hand stretched out overJerusalem."

Rambam and Rebbe Shimeon ben Lakish teach that "satan" as discussed in Iyove and other instances, refers to a person's own instincts. Not "part" of God, or another force in the universe.


More from and on Rambam:


Strikingly, Maimonides quotes the saying of the Talmud, "Rabbi Simon ben Laqish said: Satan, the evil inclination, and the angel of death are one and the same."32 This somewhat enigmatic equation seems clearer given Maimonides’ assertion that Satan stems from a root meaning "to turn away;" thus, turning away from the Law is perverting what knowledge of God one has. Therefore:


I find this to be a very clear rebuke of ascribing a belief in a Satan in Hebrew religious teachings.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 01:05 AM
link   
Just how have you heard Masons adulate Lucifer? There are no metaphors to gloss over something like that. There are two things never discussing in lodge proper: religion and politics. Outside of lodge itself, we talk about anything amongst ourselves. Beyond a belief in a monotheistic supreme being, there is no religious requirement.

Perversity in the lodge? We don't even drink in Blue lodge or AASR. The Shrine is family friendly. But there is partying.

About money? Getting members? One of the Landmarks is Masons do NOT recruit. Clandestine organizations may, but mainline Masons will not ask someone to join. There are a couple of grand lodges allowing it, but most completely frown on that.

Membership in each body is about $100 a year, plus meal costs when one actually attends, so it will vary. There is no requirement to stay. Any Mason may dimit at any time. All one has to say is "I quit." None are bound, all come of their own free will. For what they want to participate in and nothing more. There is no compulsion in Masonry.

As far as secret etc, Masons meet in clearly marked buildings at announced times. How secret is that?


partycrasher
I myself have seen and heard masons, shriners and others of this ilk state an adulation for lucifer.
when I pressed for an answer all I could get was that this lucifer adulation was more metaphor than actual worship of yhvh's adversary.
I have also heard from the mouths of masons talk of homosexual perversity in relation to the lodge.
I have also heard that not all lodges are exactly the same.
I get the feeling it is more about money, get more members to get more dues paid into the lodge to get better benefits endless sales pitch spiral,
Recently overheard conversations by new members who are not happy with joining, tired of the constant texts and phone calls from their "sponsors".
I do not get the feeling that anyone in there is very happy ,so glad I never really followed much in my anscestors footsteps because they like most masons have a strange weirdness to them and seemed more miserable than anything it must be a wretched existence.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 05:51 AM
link   

ExiledBulldawg
We don't even drink in Blue lodge or AASR.


You may want to join a lodge here in New Jersey, things are slightly different.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Yea, apparently at the end of the EA degree, you get to funnel beers while standing on your head.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 08:11 AM
link   

AugustusMasonicus

ExiledBulldawg
We don't even drink in Blue lodge or AASR.


You may want to join a lodge here in New Jersey, things are slightly different.


You should come to South Africa - our afterboards typically end at 2am!



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 08:25 AM
link   

network dude
Yea, apparently at the end of the EA degree, you get to funnel beers while standing on your head.


Yeah, we usually have to break out the tarp prior to the Master Mason Degree for conveyance purposes.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Saurus
You should come to South Africa - our afterboards typically end at 2am!


I was just reading that some of the newer Traditional Observance Lodges popping up here in the United States have to kick their members out since everyone is staying so late after the Festive Board or Collation.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Yea, well, we have tea. Sweet tea.



posted on Jan, 17 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Saurus
 

After Lodge we usually support a local bar.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


While I agree mostly about this post, and it is a very good idea for a thread, I am certain that Freemasonry is not about believing in a Supreme Being, but in fact "The Great Architect".

Now depending on stance some people might say Satan is a great architect.
Also just so those who read this know, I am not one of those people.

Also, as far as I know, it is not required of a Mason to divulge which Grand Creator they believe in, nor discuss their religious beliefs. Merely that they do believe that their is a higher power that birthed the universe.

So it probably is possible for a Satanist to become part of the brotherhood.

This does not mean it is prevalent.
Just a possibility.

However, with that said I do not link Masonry to Satanism as with many CTs who pretty much give the rest of us a bad name, because they have seen a Pyramid on TV or the Internet.


This was in no way meant to be contrary or argumentative, but more to explain what I have learned of Masonic beliefs. If wrong I will be happy to receive the criticism, to correct my opinion.

Peace.
edit on 22-1-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: Auto-Correct!



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
While I agree mostly about this post, and it is a very good idea for a thread, I am certain that Freemasonry is not about believing in a Supreme Being, but in fact "The Great Architect".


The Great Architect and Supreme Being are synonyms. The words are interchangeable as is the word God.


Now depending on stance some people might say Satan is a great architect.
Also just so those who read this know, I am not one of those people.


And as outlined in the Original Post the historical Satan cannot be a Supreme Being as he was created.


Also, as far as I know, it is not required of a Mason to divulge which Grand Creator they believe in, nor discuss their religious beliefs. Merely that they do believe that their is a higher power that birthed the universe.


It is not a 'higher power' but a Supreme Being which is totally different.


So it probably is possible for a Satanist to become part of the brotherhood.


What type of Satanist as you referring to as the way you outlined it above they would be precluded as their belief in Satan places him in a subordinate role to God.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Right I already knew that TGAOTU was the official title of God/Goddess within Masonry.
But thanks for letting me know it was interchangeable with Supreme Being.

I think you misunderstood me when I said higher power, I was referring to the creator, not angels or superior tech aliens, which may describe them in layman's terms, but doesn't necessarily define them properly, as they are not necessarily a higher power, just more knowledgable/advanced, but no more important.

By Satanist I pretty much mean that those who believe that Satan has created this Universe as it stands today, as in the Great Architect of its current design and how it is run.

But you are correct anyhow as Satan was supposedly a creation of The Almighty, therefore logically shouldn't be considered as the All Powerful.

Although my original point stand in the sense that is what they believe, many interviews with Satanists they will proclaim he is a master in design and creation(ie a Great Architect, even if only in their eyes) whether you and I disagree with them or not, so when asked do they believe in a Supreme Being, they would agree, but wouldn't have to divulge who it is. If you get what I am saying.

As I said previously I don't think it's prevalent, and I actually think the Masonic way of life is a very noble one.
Was actually thinking about attempting to join, if the brotherhood would have me, and I haven't ruled it out completely.

Peace.




top topics



 
53
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join