Should baptists be part of the free masonry?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I take it you are in support of Masonry. Yes?

As for the plucking out of the offending eye, cutting off of offending hand/foot, I do take that literal. My question is, where is the murdering and lying?

Too, If you read a little farther down Jesus addresses oaths as well. He says, let your communications be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh evil.

The blood oaths taken by masons end in murder. Do tell where we Christians are told to murder our fellow believers because they told something that was going on in the church house?

 

Sounds like to me he chose the lodge over the church. that says something doesn't it?

 

You know the masonic oath has never resulted in murder. This is proven every time we hear of a mason who leaves the lodge for whatever their personal reason.

In as much as not swearing an oath, the plucking of an eye and/hand or foot is no less a blood oath, whether acknowledged or not.

You are correct, I know many good Christians who are not masons and I know many good Christians who are masons. From your speech, of a person 'getting' saved, I am unsure as to what you do believe, almost as if the Lord is unable to save his people whom he has bought unless they complete that atonement for him.

As far as the man who 'chose' the lodge over the church, he did not. I guarantee you he is still serving the Lord, only in a less hateful, superstitious environment.

bro. Dallas:thumbs:

 

I'm not addressing those that left. I left and I'm still alive to tell the story. I'm talking about those that told the sworn oaths to none members. If someone still holds to the lodge and knows of someone that tells of anything they swore not to tell and the active member does not carry out the said oath, then that makes him a liar. If they do carry it out then they are a murderer. I don't know what is so hard to understand about that.

Well I don't see it that way. Where is the lie or murder?

It is complete in Christ. I never said one can not be saved and be a mason. My opinion is, A Christian has no business in the lodge. I've been there, I know the teachings, and I know what goes on in the lodge, so I feel I am well enough informed to give an opinion.

Perhaps you know this man personally and I will admit I do not, so you may know more than I. I was just giving my opinion to how I read the post. But I still believe that church made the right choice.

Dell

 

Totally off topic but just curious, which town near Flint? I grew up in Flushing, MI. and my grandparents live in Montrose. Just curious where you are from. Ok sorry no more derailment.

 

Brother,
You know the masonic oath forbids any Mason from with holding information known of another Mason in any case of murder or treason. Why don't you tell us this truth?

I appreciate the fact that you have been there and that you know their teachings, I am just wandering why you would think it good and proper to not equate what you are not telling us as truth is not a lie?

The word of God teaches us that if we break one law we are guilty of all. So, why have you not told us how the great unbreakable Masonic oath states clearly that no Brother Mason may protect or hide information directly implicating the act of any other Brother in commission of an act of murder or treason?

Why is that so hard to understand? If you desire to speak truth, speak the truth in full, speaking only that which provides a sense of knowledge, but removing from context or with holding other related information is the same as lying, why is that so hard to understand?

bro. Dallas

 

So, what I am getting from this post is that you are ok with someone swearing to kill someone else, as long as the others turn him in?

 

Kinda sounds like it, huh?


I do not think we, as CHRISTians, should do anything that is done in secret. In a funeral of a mason, there are parts of their ceremony that any and all can witness. And then there's another part that no one outside of masons, that can witness.......seems kinda creepy, if ya ask me....

 

You either don't understand or you don't want to understand, I think the latter.

The point is, You take an oath to kill someone, whether you actually do it or not is irrelevant, but it is because you DO NOT carry out the SWORN oath, that makes you a liar. In other words you went into an oath with no intentions of keeping it from the beginning.

 

Many are focusing on the oaths and that is fine as I do agree with them, but I have a different question. Let's say that a lost person enters the lodge for acceptance. They have to accept a supreme being no matter who or what they call him according to be received. Would you agree that during the ceremony and the statements and claims made by the person called the “most worshipful master” and the head “Deacon” that the person could easily end up thinking they have been accepted by God because for their deeds? In other words because of the ritual they go through and the words spoken in the ritual they are taught a works type salvation (them being accepted by God) even though salvation is not mentioned.

 

You Brethren can read. You have chosen to only read what you already believe. There is nothing in the Masonic oath that any Mason as a Christian is swearing to the agreement that it is ok to kill someone.

You have not and do not understand the history or Masonry. You say you were one and you know their teachings. If this were true along with what you are trying to say is truth concerning Masonry, then their would be no possibility of your having left them or they would have performed this blood oath.

A man joins Masonry of his own freedom of will, he may likewise leave Masonry according to the same freedom of will. There is no oath that says it is ok to kill someone but only that if a Mason does he can't keep it a secret. The VERY FACT that the oath forbids keeping a secret if a Mason is involved in either murder or treason is EVIDENCE of the prejudice you have against Masonry, the bias you are presenting in this topic, and the 1/2 truth you are willing to speak in order to support your position.

This is all I am saying, whether it is better to not pronounce such an oath or whether it is better to denounce such an oath by presenting only 1/2 truth, you must decide for yourself.

If you want to understand something, you must read pros and cons. If you were a Mason and left, do you not know that when you present 1/2 truth to other Masons' hearing, this will NEVER induce them to turn against Masonry? But instead will most likely strengthen them?

I do not oppose Masonry. I am a Mason and I know their teachings too. What you are presenting is only partial truth, if you and those opposing Masonry wish to base your opinions on partial truth, then inmho, you are no better or worse than those you oppose of whom you think to be in darkness.

Being in darkness does not mean one is dead in trespasses and sins. Being in darkness means one is unable to see easily or clearly which way to go, but the presentation of a road sign that only takes a person 1/2 way to the given destination is of no help nor of any usefulness to anyone.

If you oppose something give valid reasoning rather than opinion based on the presentation of half-truth. This is why I do not leave Masonry. First, God by the indwelling of His Spirit of Truth has never convicted me of its error nor chastened me for my affiliation. Second, those in opposition to Masonry do not or have not properly understood the purpose of Masonry and they oppose it from the position of this ignorance, and Third, those who leave Masonry and oppose it often attempt to oppose it on grounds of the offense of the oath, pointing to such things as to perform it is murder to not perform it is a lie, yet in the foundation of things, to NOT honor a vow which you vow, to speak such an oath but to not have it held in honor according to the truthfulness of that oath, in and of itself is a lie. Yet you wish to present yourself as knowledgeable and a worthy voice of truth speaking against that which you know nothing about.

As far as Masonic funerals, I am assistant chaplain in my local lodge, there is NO part of the funeral ceremony which is secret or no part of it would be permitted to be performed publicly. If you have ever witnessed a Masonic funeral the very fact that you have publicly witnessed that event is evidence that it is not in any part secret.

bro. Dallas :tonofbricks: :1_grouphug:

 

No Sir, the truth is that the oath prevents one Mason from hiding as fact, ANY knowledge he possesses of any other Mason in ANY case of murder or treason. There is no historic evidence that anyone ever leaving Masonry has been murdered, despite many who have left violating their 'oath' showing themselves unworthy of trust, but the oath itself has nothing in it that opposes God nor Christ, nor His people, nor their living peaceable lives in subjection to just Laws.

Masonry absolutely forbids the harboring and hiding of any information that in the case of murder or treason any other Brother Mason is involved or perpetrates either against an individual or against the peaceable continuation of government.

If you study the history of Masonry you will be able to see what Masonry stands for and opposes. This history will evidence to you that Masonry has always stood for an educated populace enabled to govern themselves, has always opposed tyranny where ever it is found because this removes the cloke of Liberty of self-governance, and Masonry has always opposed fanaticism which opposes the free worship of God according to the ability and conscience of the worshiper.

If you oppose something at least take time to know and understand its origins and history in truth, if you found your opposition on superstitious documentaries, that is not an opposition in truth nor from a position of truth.

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

I'd like to speak from a position of truth on this subject. Frogman, can you post the oath so that we can all speak on it from equal ground?

 

I will not post it but you can find it online easy enough, in full. Or you can go to Barnes & Noble and purchase books written by reputable Masonic scholars which contain the oath in full.

bro. Dallas

 

Brother Matt,
I answered you in truth. I can choose to post the oath. However I will not post the oath. The oath is not hidden and is made available if you or others wish to find it. Many who have found it present it out of context leaving off words and attempt to make it to read as if it opposes God or Christ or Christianity.

You asked me if I can post the oath, well, I can, it is no secret as some believe. But I choose not to post it.

What many people don't understand is that what has already been posted concerning the work of Masonry at its various levels is the only intent and purpose of Masonry.

Most people only wish to oppose it. I myself am a subject of Masonic aid having been born premature and staying in the incubator 32 days, reported of having died by the hospital 12 days after birth, now I have a granddaughter who has likewise received Masonic aid. She is now nearly three months old and was due on Nov. 19, 2011. By the Grace of God alone she and I are alive today because of the work of Freemasonry.

Anything I say of it you will likely oppose from your biased position, anything you say will not alter my opinion of the good and the need of continued support of Masonry.

Either make the tree good or evil. It is no doubt true that Masonry has men involved in it who are of an evil disposition, it is true that Masonry teaches a brotherhood of man, yet in our first natural man under Adam we each do stand in a position of brotherhood. It is God alone by the redemption we have in Christ and the application of that solely by the Spirit which we are made to pass from death to life. In this is truth whether I am a Mason or a Bhuddist or a Christian or any other.

A comment was made that we wouldn't want an RCC as a church member if that person retained practices and belief of the RCC, I understand this, so then I don't preach a universal church theory, as that is an RCC championed belief, but I know in eternity it is up to God as to whom I shall sit beside at His Table and receive the fullness of the cup of Salvation in the redemption of body, soul and spirit, what will I say to the LORD when he hands that cup to me and the fella sitting next to me was known to me to be a practicing RCC member who never repented and entered into the Bride of Christ? Will I then deny him to sit at the Table the LORD has prepared for him in the presence of his enemies even as has been prepared for me?

:tonofbricks:

Masonry does not present itself as a religion to subvert your church. Masonry has no intention of subverting the Church of Christ. Whatsmore, IF the idea of an invisible body which makes up the church is NOT limited to the household of faith, the family of God, but in fact IS the church triumphant, then I am sure we each will be surprised at whom we may be seated by at that Table in the world to come.

bro. Dallas :wavey:

 

It seems revealing to me that so many will take the word of a Brother who would violate such a sacred oath, yet one unwilling to violate the word of his vow before God is thought to be untrue.

bro. Dallas:tonofbricks::1_grouphug:

 

I vowed a vow to love, honor, cherish, have and to hold, support, defend and forsake all others in order to marry my wife of 23 years, in this oath I vowed to remain steadfast in sickness in health, for richer or poorer til death us do part...yet not one of you attempt to bid me come out from under this yoke of bondage???

Could it be that men no longer understand what his word is to mean once given?

Christ said let your conversation be yea and nay, James tells the same thing. Paul tells us in like manner to not strive over words, yet we think nothing of arguing, debating, proving others wrong and ourselves right.

It seems our yeas and nays are best determined by ourselves as to what is suitable to go in the between as filler and if we make an otherwise good sound brother an offender for a word and call him weak in faith because of an earthly, transient affiliation, we think it good and we have wielded the sword of the Lord in truth and cut down another infidel in his/her error.

Do we not realize that IF Masons were such great sinners among men it would be among this group the LORD would minister were he to be on this earth?

When I come to a point to where I have no longer any need of a righteousness greater than the scribes and the pharisees, then I will fear the chastening hand of God.:tear:

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

Let's say that a lost person enters the lodge for acceptance. They have to accept a supreme being no matter who or what they call him according to be received. Would you agree that during the ceremony and the statements and claims made by the person called the “most worshipful master” and the head “Deacon” that the person could easily end up thinking they have been accepted by God because for their deeds? In other words because of the ritual they go through and the words spoken in the ritual they are taught a works type salvation (them being accepted by God) even though salvation is not mentioned.

 

No because Scripture clearly teaches us this foundation standeth sure, God knoweth them that are his.

It doesn't matter what I receive intellectually that does not make me a child of God nor does that make me a non-child of God. What makes any person a child of God is the witness of the Spirit of Adoption having been sent into his/her heart crying ABBA, Father.

Now, the very evidence that such a person would even erroneously come to think they are able to serve God through a 'works' system is evidence of their having been born of this Spirit, for this reason, Peter was sent to Cornelius.

We ought to not pay lip service to Grace, but attempt to bind the word of God such that we make Christ to teach that except a man believe he can't see nor enter into the kingdom of heaven. The true statement of Christ is that except that ye be born again...Paul said too that if ye are made to feel after him, then seek him...any person who fears God possesses the beginning of wisdom, even in an erroneous religious system of 'works' which is also found among many Christian groups, even among some Baptists, is denying Grace, for Paul said it is either by grace or works, and if grace, then works are no more but if by works, then grace is no more.

The child of God does not seek God because he/she knows the gospel or has heard the gospel. A child of God seeks God because they are his child and he has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into their hearts.

So no, there is no danger of any one of whom God gave to Christ and for whom Christ redeemed (bought with the price of His blood and now they belong to him in error or truth) failing of receiving the earnest of the inheritance which is the Spirit despite of their depth of knowledge or understanding.

We are not called in the Gospel to make sheep, but to feed the sheep and thereby to make disciples, or students of Christ. In the same way you speak toward one entering Masonry under a false hope it is just as likely that one could enter into the church under a false hope, but Paul clearly tells us in several places (Heb. 10 is one) that we are not of those who believe this, but we believe unto the saving (preservation) of the soul. This preservation is of and by the Free Grace of God upon ALL for whom Christ died and is not related to their works of obedience, righteousness nor any other work, or we ought to lay aside Grace and all speak that which we mean, that the only way we may receive eternal life is by works we have done and continue in doing (perseverance).

No, there is no such danger of a none elect being falsely led to believe he is a child by error, nor is there any danger of the elect being deceived for they hold this witness within themselves, IF it is needful that we justify each other, then we have no need of Christ and he is died in vain.

Our justification is by Free Grace, by Christ's resurrection and living forever having died and now living, by His blood and finally, but timely, by our faith.

Justifying faith is toward peace with God in hearing, believing and living according to the fact of a hope in God which that faith is the substance of our already standing in such Grace that God will be merciful, faith is the realization of the hope of all the OT saints that the promised seed WILL come, and the realization of all under the gospel dispensation that He has come.

Now, if the body of doctrine that I follow is that which determines my Eternal Life, then Paul clearly told Timothy to take heed to himself and to his doctrine that in so doing he would both save himself and his hearers, so then it is not Christ, but the preacher who eternally saves according to the message he preaches?

Of course this is error, but many believe this whether they know they do or not, thus they are continually binding God's dear children in the spirit of bondage to fear rather than showing them their deliverer and deliverance from bondage to the fear of death.

Now, do you believe that Eternal Life is by works? Paul was telling Timothy to take heed because that salvation under consideration is a gospel salvation in the knowledge of our now possessing peace with God through the reconciliation of Christ in the offering of His body once for all. There is no other offering we may bring to atone for our sins, not even faith in a proper body of doctrine for we each believe or know only in part, so then all we are able to bring is a peace/fellowship offering through Christ.

Apart from this we will have no true experiential knowledge or Rest in Christ, but we may very well be children of the King by the witness of the Spirit of His life in us.

bro. Dallas

 

Your question identifies the very person whom Christ came to seek and to save. The lost. Where does he say he came to seek and to save any sheep that were not lost?

Where does he call the wicked his sheep? Not sinners because we are all sinners by nature and Christ died for us while we were yet sinners, this is free grace...so, where are the wicked said to be lost sheep? The 'lost' are not the same as the wicked. If there are 99 and the shepherd leaves these to go get one, he is going to get one that IS HIS ALREADY, not one that is not his.

bro. Dallas