Freemasonry: Good, Bad, Indifferent

I’ll go with bad, but not for the reasons Bro. James suggests.

This was a hot topic about a decade (or more?) ago within the SBC and I’ve read blog after blog. What I’ve determined is that those who view Freemasonry as paramount to worshipping a pagan god are just as delusional as those Freemasons who trace their fraternity to antiquity.

I say this for several reasons:

First, it is a fact that several of the charges against Freemasonry are nothing more than urban legend. This would include the myth that freemasons worship a pagan deity named Baphomet (a contribution to the myth by Leo Taxil, usually represented by Eliphas Levi’s imagery of a Sabbatic Goat ) or that they , as a fraternity, worship a god period. You can toss Albert Pike in the mix of false charges as well (although I think the guy was a nut).

Second, most freemasons gather and have a meaningless business meeting (which is secrete…i.e., confidential), eat sandwiches, and go home. They do provide a service through their charities, but this is something that I believe should be accomplished (for the Christian) through the church.

My experience

I had to write a paper as an undergrad majoring in business. I was taking a world religions course and had to choose a religion that was not my own. I chose Freemasonry and started to work. When I turned in the topic it was declined because the professor did not consider freemasonry a religion (I wrote on the Catholic church instead).

But I found the topic interesting and the more I read the more I realized that the anti-masons were using invented charges and the freemasons seemed to be inflating what they did. In a way, the freemasons were taking advantage of the “mystery” while claiming to be a greater organization than they were. Anyway, I joined a lodge to see.

I completed the three degrees (which are really the highest in ranking one can obtain as the York Rite and Scottish Rite are dependent on the “Blue Lodge” and they “meet on the level”… i.e., everyone is equal once they finish the 3rd degree).

I then went through the Scottish Rite and later the York rite (Royal Arch Masonry, Cryptic Masonry, Knights Templar). Later I presided over a lodge and conferred degrees (I’d be a “Past Master”).

My Conclusion

The problem with Freemasonry is not that it is a false religion (it is not, except perhaps as secular humanism is a religion and then only how it is taken individualistically). But it is gnostic in nature. It pretends to have a secret knowledge (which is really hidden only in false charges and rumors).

The fraternity plays with dark imagery. In just about any degree the candidate takes an oath not to reveal the “secrets” of the lodge on a severe penalty. The wording is one of death (specific ways of execution) but if one looks closer (as one should) the “blood oath” is really one of being expelled which is thought of as “no less a penalty” than such and such a death. In a York Rite degree the candidate is in a room looking at a skull, a candle, and an hour glass (contemplating mortality). In another the candidate drinks wine out of a replica of a skull.

The biggest problem is that freemasonry, at its core, is secular humanism. It seeks to unify man for the benefit of mankind not under God but under the humanity. The only reason belief in a supreme being is required is that man must have the belief that he is accountable to some higher power to be trusted. I’ve seen people substitute the fraternity for Christianity, and I’ve seen church members active in the fraternity but dead in church.

I'd caution people about joining the Masons, but I wouldn't consider them less a Christian if they did. I am not so sure that those who preach in the pulpit, but unknowingly preach falsely, against freemasonry do not do more damage to people's faith than the fraternity has ever done. I say this because there are always things people will substitute for discipleship, but there has always been one message the church is to proclaim to the world.

I have not been a member for quite some time, but if you have any questions please feel free to PM me. I don't get into this type of "discussion" in an open forum anymore because there really are books and books of conspiracy theories and "old wives tales" that people have bought into (on both sides of the issue). What I know is from experience, but it is not something I'll waste my time arguing.

 

We had an active church a town over (SBC) that had a pastor who “learned” quite a bit and started a sermon series campaigning against Freemasonry. The problem, of course, is that there were several members who belonged to the fraternity and others who were familiar with it (ex-masons and family members of masons).

This was the most active and largest church in the city (a small town, this wasn’t a very large church but it wasn’t a small one either). When all was said and done the pastor was asked to resign and they split into two dead churches. The pastor’s congregation built a church but it wasn’t long before sermons turned to the Fraternal Order of Police (because they have very similar oaths and swear to keep their secrets under the same penalty….which, I admit, may be a bit troubling as we are talking about those who enforce our laws). Several of my friends (who worked at the Sheriffs Dept) left and ultimately that pastor left town (I don’t know what he’s doing now….probably campaigning against Lord of the Rings and open toe shoes).

My point is that churches really need to be careful when they decide to take a stand against these types of things. This pastor was gullible and from what I have heard (from both sides) what he preached from the pulpit was misinformation and conspiracy theory. I am confident he thought he was doing the right thing, but the result was that an active and godly church died and was replaced by two very dead and very ungodly churches.

 

Each church should determine these things. Even if their view is influenced by fake news it is still their view and it affects the church. I remember a pastor telling me that he believed the passage about deacons in Tim. concerned polygamy instead of divorce, but that it was proper to respect the voice of the congregation on such matters.

Technically, one can't be a member of our church if they engage in the sell of alcohol. I don't know if this is enforced.

While I disagree that the church should exclude people because they are a member of the Freemasons (unless, perhaps, it includes other fraternities that also take such oaths....e.g., the FOP, Elks,....Water Buffaloes ....), I respect that type of church for taking the command to be a holy people seriously. For me, I think that this is ultimately a matter of Christian liberty.

 

Interesting. I have also read the introduction (it was a KJV) but the one I read was not at all like that. I wonder if it's because each state has its own fraternity (there isn't a national group but a bunch of fraternities that recognize each other).

I agree that Freemansonry makes their degrees "dark", and this is one thing I have against the organization. We are not (as Christians) to seek darkness but to seek light. The oaths are about the same as the oath for the FOP (which is why I mentioned them) except that they include things like not sharing the secrets of the lodge under "no less a penalty" of some extreme execution (i.e., throat cut ear from ear, tongue torn out, ect.), which in that same degree is explained to be expulsion (which is to be considered "no less a penalty than..."). The FOB just has them swear not to reveal their secrets under the penalty of expulsion (same thing, different language).

 

When we looked at our church constitution (my last church) it said the same thing (not to engage in the sell or production of alcohol). But I know several grocery store owners who are prominent members (and teaching Sunday School) who do sell alcohol in their stores.

At my current church we have the same standard, but I am not really sure where they draw the line on Christian liberty (I don't think we would exercise church discipline if someone had a glass of wine at dinner, for example).

 

Mississippi is a weird state, I guess.

But yes, you are right that, being secular, the principle of freemasonry is uniting men regardless of religion. They do require a belief in some type of supreme being (the idea that men must believe they are accountable to something or someone]. Where you are wrong is that Freemasonry has no god nor religious dogma (in terms of worship). They are a very humanistic organization.

 

I didn't realize they taught "another gospel".

I can tell you that when I was in the organization that I didn't teach nor hold another gospel (nor did they hold the true gospel either). I think that this is why so many who are masons get offended (what is said in the pulpit often does not match with what they have experienced). This is why that church I mentioned was torn apart. The pastor was a good man, but he was also gullible when it came to "old wives tales". The Freemasons (and many other such groups) have become their own worst enemy because they like to obscure things in archaic language. They can't come back from the image they embraced in the past. That, coupled with gullible pastors who think they teach religion and worship a god, makes for an unhealthy environment.

As I said earlier, I believe this is a matter of Christian liberty - which is something the believer sets aside for their brothers and sisters in Christ. And this is why a Christian should not be a mason - not because they teach "another gospel" but for the sake of the church.

I like the bylaws that @Deacon mentioned - Christians have no business being a part of "secret organizations".

 

As I mentioned at the start, there are some un-Christlike brothers who make the topic difficult to truly discuss due to the unfortunate combination of gullibility and gossip. Thank you for that demonstration, brother.

This is why this thread will get nowhere. Those who don't know read such and such and those with first hand knowledge drank the koolaide. We just end up with this type of logical fallacy even when you and I are on the same side of the issue.

I went white water rafting last weekend (my first time). They had this rock called "idiot rock" because of the idiots who jumped off it into the river. You are on that rock, brother. We, as Christians, do not need to get into conspiracy stupidity in order to address these things.

You were wrong in your implication towards me. I told you my experience and pointed out where common myth differed. I do not advocate Freemasonry, not am I a member. But, unlike some, I will not forfeit my integrity as I speak of why I believe Christians should not be masons.