Why Would a Pastor Condone Freemasonry

Vows were simply seen as serious business, and one's word as sacred and binding. You can find the OT fathers doing the same thing when making covenant agreements with one another, which was usually sealed by some sign, the most common of which was probably placing one's hand under the other's thigh. When I was little, we always did something similar with the motion of "cross my heart."

Besides, even within the one that was quoted, the admission is obvious that "I can't do this on my own," therefore the phrase is added that calls for divine aid in carrying out one's obligation:

The so-called "penalty" is not something that is ever intended to be taken literally, it simply points out how seriously the candidate takes his commitment. It does not say "binding myself under the penalty....," it says, "binding myself under no less a penalty..." The penalty suffered is inward, not literally carried out. Another place in the same ritual you quoted says something about being stuck by a sharp object, and states that it represents the sharp inner pain to mind and conscience that woud come with willful violation.

Trying to make literal that which is intended as symbolic is folly. Try that with Song of Solomon and you wind up with a bride with dove's eyes behind her veil, hair like a flock of goats, teeth like a flock of shorn sheep, a neck like the tower of David, and honey and milk under her tongue--all of which would cause the literalist to conclude that Solomon needed glasses.

TW

 

(One of the driving and most motivatiing forces behind one joining and remaining in the Lodge is the enormous political connections, favoritism, and the like. Some Masons, if they are honest, can tell you stories of how they or others have gotten out of traffic tickets, found jobs, received raises & promotions, gotten discounts in the marketplace, etc. all because of their leveraging the fact that they are Masons. I know this for a fact, because it has worked for me in the past.)

True enuff Mike when you have a friend you do wnat to look out for them like helping him kept his job and so forth. And if another mason wishes to give his brother a price break than that is there choice. I have heard but never seen stories about Masons getting out of tickets and what not. But I have seen Masons getting tickets for speeding. But it goes the same even more so for Pastors I know that have gotten a discount or Free items bacause they were a Pastor. And they have gotten out of speeding tickets because they were a pastor. And have kept their job when alot of people around them got laid off because they were a Pastor. The fact is that friends try to look out for each other as best they can wether it be by given them a discount or helping them keep there Job. As far as the Ticket I do not agree that they should be let off just because they are a Pastor or a Mason.

 

Exactly what is that supposed to mean?

You seem to have me confused with someone else--that is, unless they have changed the rules and started admitting women.

And anyway, if what you said were true, wouldn't it make sense that most initiates would simply never come back? Actually, the word gets around, and guys pretty much understand that it is symbolic, a lot is learned before anyone ever joins. If you were honest, you'd admit that, instead of trying to paint a picture that simply doesn't exist, of guys going into this thing thinking "bed of roses," only to hear the obligation and go, "Oh my God, what have I done, entering this chamber of horrors?" The whole idea is ridiculous, especially as much accurate information as there is available about Masonry now--I speak of course, of the real picture of Masonry and not yours.

TW

(P.S.--Would it be helpful if I changed the nic to "the Woman?")

 

[edit]

You are the one not making sense, are you sure you read the oath that was posted? The final lines:

Who has the responsibility of carrying out the obligation or enforcing the penalty? I'd say "binding myself" puts it all on the initiate, a self-discipline toward fulfilling the thing pledged. How will that obligation be carried out, what will be the source of its strength? Seems to me that "so help me God" indicates the initiate will enlist divine aid in carrying this out.

TW

[ May 29, 2004, 03:48 AM: Message edited by: DHK ]

 

(Again, assuming you had not known beforehand, you would have breathed a sigh of relief at this point given the assurance that the penalty is not to be taken seriously. But after having this so dramatically impressed while under blindfold, who's willing to take a chance to see if this is true and not to be fulfilled?)

Mike you could have just asked if you had studied it before hand you would have already know the answer.

(However, had you or any other Mason NOT been told it [the penalty] was merely symbolic, you and they along with the rest of us would have to assume it is to be taken literally. So, quit trying to mislead the members of this forum into thinking otherwise.)
Well I for one would not have taken it literally because there are you and others out there like you who have not been kill as you put it. But that is the whole reason you the explaination of the Obligation to let you know they are symbolic.

(I said earlier, that the Masonic God (G.A.O.T.U.) is not The One True Living God of Holy Scripture. )

Mike the God in the ritual is YHWH if you do not think YHWH is God than that is up to you. And as I said earlier the sbc said Freemasonry says God in the Threefold aspect of the Trinity. So again if you do not believe in YHWH in the Threefold aspect of the Trinity that is fine it is your choice. But to be a mason you do not have to believe in YHWH. Althou Jews, Muslims and Christians believe in YHWH only Christians believe in YHWH in the Threefold aspect of the Trinity.

 

I'm not sure what the arguement is. Is it because freemasonery is a secret society, or is it because they're ecuminical?

I can understand the secret society concern, but the concerns about ecuminism are a bit overblown. By that reckoning, one should also refrain from membership in the Boy Scouts, Little League, and Alcoholics Anonymous.

 

Sorry, but even if there are any of those near me, I have no idea who or where they are. And besides, you had it all neatly sewed up that I was a Freemason, and not only that, a pastor, not a co-mason, Eastern Star, or Daughter of Isis. But you seem to have a knack for starting your posts off by making the person the issue, and going from there wherever the wind blows. Guess the fact you ignored the rest of my post simply means there is no counter for it. And so far every limb you've gone out one has added further proof to what I've already said: "Trying to make literal that which is intended as symbolic is folly." And that folly shows up strongest in the argument, "Perhaps you are among a few overly zealot, devote Masons who are so in love with the fraternity that they would slit their own throats." Or did you forget, it's not literal?

And thank you for the string of quotes, they describe things pretty accurately, if you learn to highlight the proper parts:

In other words, you just posted quotes that affirm Freemasonry is (1) not racially biased,(2) not a religion, and (3) genuine in their practice of charity. You do ok, you're just a bit o.f.f. in your emphasis.

TW

 

O.F.F.
Are you attempting to threaten or scare TW?
Whatever it is you're trying to do, I suggest you back off of making personal remarks as you have thus far to her, or to any other poster.
Stick with the topic and with posting in a Christian manner please.
Gina

 

If this statement is true, why bother to post any of the rest that followed?

You're about as subtle as a Mack truck.

Well, I wasn't planning on posting any links just yet, as my webpage is pretty much in its infancy, but since you insist on this absurdity, you may go to http://www.freewebs.com/anti-anti-masonicstufff/page2.htm and take a little peek at me. I had not included one in my profile since there was not a picture of me anywhere on the web that I know of. And this one is only temporary, I'm not only a bit shy but pretty cautious about this internet stuff and privacy issues. And I'm very new at doing webpages and such, so feel free to snicker at the amateurish nature of what is there so far. Sorry you don't seem willing to let me be who I am, but I guess it sort of goes with the territory, so no hard feelings.

TW (Lynn73)

 

Thank you TW. Concerns like these should be handled this way, privately. If you truly think someone is here with a deceitful intent the moderators may be notified via pm.
Don't feel as if you're not supposed to post at all.
Now, back to the subject of Freemasonry everyone.
Gina

 

I think the key phrase here is "as a Mason." As an African-American, if that means you tried to exercise Landmark 14, you were denied because of Prince Hall affiliation. While there are some lodges which still would not allow "the right of visitation" on that basis, it is my understanding that the barriers you describe have very much come down, and the others are soon to follow. Racism is no different within Freemasonry than it is anywhere else, the roots don't disappear overnight.

Perhaps you would do well to define "moral relativism," and you would do even better to point out where you have shown it to be so in Freemasonry. If you're referring to the remark, "Masonry teaches the practice of all good morals, leaving the interpretation of right and wrong to the individual conscience," then you're mistaken to say I ignored it. It would be more accurate to say it is so o.f.f. the mark, it was not really worth a reply, but since you insist--I can see by the wording of the statement why you took it as you did, but I can see by the statement itself that the writer of it had no "relativism" as you try to define it in mind at all. As you have repeated many times before, "moral" is not a term that is exclusive at all. When I made comments earlier about a person exhibiting Christian fruits, you tried to recast what I said as a statement about morals instead, and suggested that upright, moral behavior was not a good indicator of Christianity because non-Christians may be moral without being Christian. So if you truly believe that, it is inconsistent of you to now attack the idea of Freemasonry being moral, or of morality being somehow sub-Christian, rather than extra-Christian, which is how you have already portrayed it to be per your earlier argument. To be frank, your positions are chameleonic and conveniently reframed and retailored to be suited to whichever argument you happen to be involved in at the moment.

A comparison that is probably in order, is the U.S. judicial system, which has been extricably linked to Judaeo-Christian values by having its infra-structure founded on the same basic building blocks, namely the 10 Commandments. Despite recent attempts to dislodge and separate the legal system from their religious moorings, they remain forever founded there in moral principle. I'm sure you have no problem agreeing that the country was founded on biblical principles, whether you would call them "Christian" per se or not. Yet for some reason you can't make the same acknowledgment when it comes to Freemasonry, even though the moral principles it sets forth were founded on the Holy Scriptures. They are cited again and again in Masonry, whether it be Masonic authors, rituals, or whatever other form you choose to criticize. The initiate is assured that there will be nothing in the oaths taken to conflict with "religious or political opinions, be they what they may," and unless they are mistakenly viewed with a literal interpretation, that assurance is true as stated. Since you are fond of quotes:

I will ask you, if you can, to point out which of these things expresses a principle that is contrary to a scriptural position.

You may also point out to me what the whole issue is with "relativism" in relation to these, when Christianity has had no problem for centuries now in acknowledging that other moral systems, such as the Code of Hammurapi, express in principle basically the same ideas.

In other words, if you still don't quite follow, please explain for us how you get "moral relativism" to suggest "whatever floats your boat" from a quote that was clearly intended to address only the idea that there are shared moral values even within the wide diversity of religious systems that exist?

 

(I tried to exercise Landmark 14 -- "the right of visitation" -- and was denied for no other reason than my race as an African-American.)

Mike you belonged to a unrecongnized lodge in that state. IF you were a Prince Hall in Virgina you would have been able to visit because it is acknowledged by the Grnad Lodge of that state. I believe you said you were a PH in NC right I may be mistaken but I thought that is what you said earlier. And by the way there are other clandestain lodges out there that are not PH Masons some of the Rosicruciana are not acknowledged as Masonic bodies by Grand Lodges and they have white members so do not try to turn it into a race issue. It is not due to the color of your skin it is due to you lodge is not acknowledged as a Masonic body by the Grand Lodge of that state. Currently in NC there are dicussions on acknowloging the Prince Hall Masons as is the Grand Lodge of Alabama. Virgina already acknowledges the Prince Hall Masons and it is below the Mason Dixon Line.

U.S. Southern States
United States Southern states history, events in the South, and information on the Southern states.


The U.S. Southern States or The South is perhaps the most distinctive region of the United States having its own uniquely Southern historical prespective, Southern customs and Southern cuisine. There is some overlap with The Southwest and the Mid-Atlantic States.

The South is nicknamed Dixie. A song by that title was written by an Ohio minstrel show composer, Daniel Decatur Emmett, first published by Phillip Werlein in New Orleans in 1859.


States always considered part of the South are:

Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
Virginia


As I told you before Brothern from my Lodge when they went to the yearly Grand Lodge meeting said that there were Africain AMericans in the meeting as well. So either they lied or you did not know about intergraded Lodges in Tennessee.

(It's been proven that Freemasonry is a false religion, and is arguably a "cult" as well. And, no amount of genuine charity can make up for it's biblical heresy and moral relativism.)

It has not been proven but is your opnion.

 

Dr. Bob
Please present a webpage or ducment that we may read about it.

(There are solid definitions of cults (we've covered them many times on this forum) and what distinguishes them from orthodox Christian religion.)

Please give me some links as well so that I may read them also.