Freemasonry

[frewtloop]

Freemasonry is continual effort to exalt the nobler nature over the ignoble, the spiritual over the material, the divine in man over the human.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sounds noble but it is not Christian. This is Gnostic. It is the dichotomy between the spiritual and material and the "divine in man" above the "human." The phrase "the divine in man" sounds like the divine spark in every man, which is a Gnostic belief.

That's funny, "the divine in man" only sounds like to me the indwelling Holy Spirit. I assume Pike considers as he writes that he is writing for a larger body than just a Christian audience, and expresses his remarks accordingly.

A purification of the self from the worldly and material in order to attain a higher spiritual status, as well as an ability to rule the passions

OK, let me play with this for a moment the same way you do with Albert Pike. The above statement, lifted out and placed by itself this way, has it appearing Christian in nature. Granted, the language is not quite what you would find in a Christian context, but it still works. Let's go back to the fruit again:

Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.--John 15:2

Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (2 Cor. 7:1)

There's the purifying. . .

3 As we know Jesus better, his divine power gives us everything we need for living a godly life. He has called us to receive his own glory and goodness! 4 And by that same mighty power, he has given us all of his rich and wonderful promises. He has promised that you will escape the decadence all around you caused by evil desires and that you will share in his divine nature.

5 So make every effort to apply the benefits of these promises to your life. Then your faith will produce a life of moral excellence. A life of moral excellence leads to knowing God better. 6 Knowing God leads to self-control. Self-control leads to patient endurance, and patient endurance leads to godliness. 7 Godliness leads to love for other Christians, and finally you will grow to have genuine love for everyone. 8 The more you grow like this, the more you will become productive and useful in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.--2 Peter 1:3-8

As for "ability to rule the passions," see v. 6 for the "self-control."

See how easy it is?

TW

[ May 19, 2004, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: Gina L ]

 

[Ben W]

Here is an exerpt from a Masonic Document stating exactly what the Freemasons think of Albert Pike. To keep suggesting that Albert Pike is in any way a Masonic Figurehead is an absolute nonesense.

Freemasonry, Solito Press Adelaide, 1999

"Pike was largley self educated, an omnivourous reader, particurly in theology, mystacism and the occult. His voluminous and largley indigestable writings show that he rarely understood what he had read. He was by nature autocratic, and believed that he was entitled to issue circulars to all members of the Rite, whether they were under his durastiction or not. He was politley ignored by Masonic authority, but some of his writings are still quoted by critics as if repitition would make them more credible. He is certainley no widely read nor a recognised authority on Freemasonry".

What is the point of contantly quoting Pike, when the lodge openly states that he is not what is claimed in their own primary documents?

When you go to anti masonic sites and read all about how christian Freemasons need to have all these supposed curses broken off them, consider the words of Jesus Christ when He said in John 8:36 "If the Son has made you free, you shall be Free indeed". Christians are Free in Christ, not under the Gnostic religion preached by the anti masons that suggests that once Jesus Christ has set you free then there are further things that you have to do to be free.

The gift that Jesus gives is Free to all that seek it. When He forgives you he sets you free. When He is in your life you are never under any curse or bondage. Unlike what Gnosticm teaches. The same Gnosticm that has crept into the church and degenerated the Cross. The Same Gnostiscm preached on the anti masonic sites.

Yes that is a little strong a statement, yet when you see church after church losing focus on the Cross and what Jesus did, you get a little anti yourself of people that attempt to tell people that Jesus Christ did not do enough to set them free.

 

[D28guy]

Worm,

"True. The only problem is, since you put it on that basis, you forget that at the time Paul wrote these words, the canon was not complete."

Irelavent.

You forgot to take into consideration that Paul did not write the scriptures...God did. And God knew full well that His scriptures would be used as His truth standard in 2004 just as the scriptures were in the 1st century.

So, God designed the scriptures to apply to Paul and Timothy in the context that it worked in the 1st century, and also to us today in the context of the whole of scriptures.

"So obviously if Paul was writing to Timothy what you suggest, that Timothy was going to be furnished with all the teaching of all the truth of the Word, and this was what it meant to be "complete,""

That was what was meant by "complete" then. However, now, "complete" means the 66 books of the scriptures.

"then I'm afraid Paul missed it by about 30 years..."

Paul did not write the scriptures, he was being used of God just like the other writers were.

"and perhaps half a dozen books, depending on whose count you go by, which were not even written yet."

Irelavent. Now they all have been written. God knew there would be the year 2004, so He wrote it with that in mind.

"I'm afraid this is the point at which your interpretation fails."

Hopefully this post will be sufficient to show that my point stands.

"Strike two."

It appears the umpire is blind.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

[frewtloop]

That was what was meant by "complete" then. However, now, "complete" means the 66 books of the scriptures.

After that nifty little move, I doubt you have any room left to be casting around any more accusations of "spin."

 

[O.F.F.]

Worm, you said earlier:

Your error comes in wishing for Masonry to be something it never was and was never intended to be: Christian in form and content, doctrine and expression. Strange requirements for a group that meets fraternally and makes no claims to even be a religion.

I agree that Freemasonry is not Christian in any shape, form or fashion. Yet, if this true, than how can Masons say that Freemasonry is compatible with biblical Christianity? If it is not Christian, it's not compatible. If it is compatible, it must be able to demonstrate that in some shape, form, content, doctrine or expression.

If it is not a religion; than why the requirement for membership to believe in any Supreme Being of choice, why the requirement for membership of belief in a resurrection to a future life, why meet in temples, why the altar in the center of the lodge, why kneel before it in prayer, why have a VSL (volume of sacred law) rest upon it [altar], why have officers who are referred to as deacons, why all the "religiousity" in it's teachings if it is not a religion? Can you honestly say that this doesn't sound like a religion to you?

As a former Mason, I can attest to the fact that all of the above elements exist in Freemasonry. It wasn't until the Holy Spirit led me out of the Lodge for Christ, that I looked back at what I was TAUGHT in light of Scripture. As a result, I found its teachings to conflict with biblical Christianity and I came to realize that Freemasonry is indeed a religion, no matter how much it claims it is not.

The following link will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Freemasonry is in fact a false religion.

The Religion of Freemasonry

 

[frewtloop]

"and perhaps half a dozen books, depending on whose count you go by, which were not even written yet."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Irelavent. Now they all have been written. God knew there would be the year 2004, so He wrote it with that in mind.

Sorry about that, but I'm afraid you just got convicted by your own words: " We do not interpret scripture based upon a view of one word, or by bolding something that we like."

The same is true of your new assessment of interpretation. And it doesn't matter what God knew about 2004 at all, what really matters is what you wrote in 2004, namely:

We interpret scripture by comparing scripture with scripture, and allowing scripture to explain itself.

In light of the whole of scripture we can come to no other conclusion than that Gods scriptures... the 66 books called the old and new testaments. ..are our God given "truth standard" to use to judge doctrines, practices, beliefs, "gospels", religious systems, etc.

That is what God means when He tells us that with the scriptures we are complete, and thoroughly equipped for the work of God.

So no matter how you choose to spin it now, your words are abundantly clear, we allow Scripture to interpret itself. In the same way, our words speak clearly, and yours certainly spoke clearly there. "The whole of Scripture," the 66 books, that is the standard God has set. So it is clear Timothy in no way met that standard. It's even more clear that you are not above stretching any standard you need stretched to enforce your points. End of argument.

Strike three

TW

 

[frewtloop]

Yes that is a little strong a statement, yet when you see church after church losing focus on the Cross and what Jesus did, you get a little anti yourself of people that attempt to tell people that Jesus Christ did not do enough to set them free.

Amen Ben,

And don't forget, He promised, "Behold, I am with you always , even unto the ends of the earth."

Some people seem to think that when a Christian walks through that lodge door, Jesus waits outside. I thought this being a Baptist board, folks would have a better sense of their security in Christ than that. Would it be safe to suggest that either (1) since not all on this site are Baptist, perhaps that gets reflected in this (not that I really think so), or (2) some are not so Baptist as it might seem?

TW

 

[Jacob Webber]

(I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. preview not available. Click the link for more information.)

To which God is this pledge going to and is it a Bloody obligation because you pledge to defend.

 

[O.F.F.]

Worm, you said:

Some people seem to think that when a Christian walks through that lodge door, Jesus waits outside. I thought this being a Baptist board, folks would have a better sense of their security in Christ than that. Would it be safe to suggest that either (1) since not all on this site are Baptist, perhaps that gets reflected in this (not that I really think so), or (2) some are not so Baptist as it might seem?

If a Christian walks into a pornograghic book store, he doesn't leave Jesus outside either. Just because he has security in Christ, doesn't mean he should go there.

Going into a Masonic Temple is no different. As a Christian, he should no more walk into a lodge to have spiritual fellowship and pray with non-believers via Masonic ritual, than he should walk into a Hindu temple or Islamic mosque to do the same, even if his prayers are directed to Jesus in his own mind. It's a violation of the First Commandment that ignites the jealousy of God who says we are to worship Him in spirit and in truth and to love Him with all of our hearts, soul, mind and strength. No matter how much one trys, it's impossible to honor God through the "one sizes fit's all," "generic" God of Freemasonry.

You seem to think that every Mason who walks into a lodge is a Christian, or that all those who profess their faith as such are. Would it be safe to suggest that either (1) since not all Masons are Christian, perhaps that gets reflected in Masonic teachings, or (2) some are not as Christian as you make them seem?

Order of FORMER Freemasons

 

[frewtloop]

Jacob,

(I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. preview not available. Click the link for more information.)

What pledge is this exactly? I know it sounds familiar, but I never noticed how "masonic" it sounds.

TW

 

[Eladar]

To which God is this pledge going to and is it a Bloody obligation because you pledge to defend.

I agree. This country was founded on the precepts of Freemasonry. Just look at the layout of Washington DC. It is one giant Satanic symbol.

 

[Jacob Webber]

It is the Army Pledge according to the Enclypedia.


(You seem to think that every Mason who walks into a lodge is a Christian, or that all those who profess their faith as such are. Would it be safe to suggest that either (1) since not all Masons are Christian, perhaps that gets reflected in Masonic teachings, or (2) some are not as Christian as you make them seem?)

No not at all you should no this. Not every person who walks in the Church is a Christian.

Let me ask this question. I know everyone that works with me is not a Christian. I come to work and fellowship with them everyday just about. When we have a Plant Wide meeting we sometimes have Prayer so should I tell the COE of my company that He is worshipping Satan because He held a cooperate prayer to God and there were people in the room who do not believe in the same God that he does.


And the Five Pointed Star is the Star of Jacob which is a representation of Jesus Christ

Num 24:17 I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.


Now people have twisted it to be satantic and use it for satanic practices.

 

[frewtloop]

Just look at the layout of Washington DC. It is one giant Satanic symbol.

More like one giant antimasonic myth. Somebody obviously sitting around with too much time on their hands, and nothing better to do than analyze maps of Washington and rearrange numbers on dollar bills. After awhile they're bound to come up with something bizarre. I even found one recently that not only does the Washington thing, they're looking at the logo of Dallas Theological Seminary, of all people, and suggesting they have a satanic logo.

There may be other sites with better rebuttals of this nonsense, but here's one:

http://www.masonicfax.com/LAYOUT.htm

 

[Marcia]

Worm, you said:

Your comment, "That is not why Jesus suffered on the cross -- it was not because he consorted with the poor and lowly," does not address any point that was made at all. Where, pray tell, do you see in the material, "This is why Jesus suffered on the cross?" That is a misrepresentation of what is said, reading into a passage something that is not there.

I quoted it directly from Ch. 29:

He suffered upon it, because He consorted with and taught the poor and lowly, and found His disciples among the fishermen of Galilee and the despised publicans.

Yes, I am picky about Jesus because there are so many counterfeit Christs out there. So if Jesus is mentioned, even if the cross is mentioned, one must examine what is being said about Jesus and the cross. I already gave examples of where these things are presented in completely unbiblical ways, yet because the cross is mentioned, some people will think it's Christianity, both Christians and non-Christians.

I already admitted Pike draws from other beliefs, some of these I studied before I was a Christian. But then at certain points he gives his own view or teaching.

But let's put aside Pike since you say that most Masons don't read Pike or regard him as an authority, I refer you to the information in the link posted earlier to the the booklet put out by the SBC, and to the posts by O.F.F., the former Mason, especially the posts dated May 19.

A Christian has a responsibility not to mislead others or make weaker brothers in the faith stumble. When a Christian takes part in Freemasonry, they are possibly leading others into teachings incompatible with Christianity, or participating in an organization that gives unbelievers the impression that one can reach heaven by being a good Mason. It's already been shown that that idea is in Masonry.

Since Freemasonry keeps saying that they don't exalt one religion over the other, but then teach about being pure and good, it would be easy for people to think they can stand before God based on their own good works. That is a really fatal error and Christians should not be supporting anything that even breathes a hint of that.

Even in Rainbow one finds this. In one pamphlet, it talks about nature and evergreens and then says:

In this way perhaps God was telling us that if we remain steadfast in our ideals and beliefs, we will never die, and our souls will live forever. Thus Immortality is ours for the believing.

(Quote from "Rainbows Are Real" put out by The International Order of the Rainbow for Girls, State of Pennsylvania).

In the Rainbow ritual book, Jesus is alluded to as Master Teacher and Master of Life but never as Savior. He is held up more as an example of a moral being. There are also references to religion and there is a Sister of Religion in the ritual.

With these kinds of teachings which seem endemic to Freemasonry, as has been pointed out elsewhere, it would be quite easy for a non-Christian to think from this that being good will get them into heaven. If there is any possibility of misleading people, it is not the kind of an organization a Christian should belong to.

 

[D28guy]

Worm,

I said...

"That was what was meant by "complete" then. However, now, "complete" means the 66 books of the scriptures."

And you said...

"After that nifty little move, I doubt you have any room left to be casting around any more accusations of "spin.""

Friend, you are losing credibility fast. Are you actually saying its "spin" to say that Almighty God knew there would be a 2004 and His scriptures apply in 2004, and that God is "smart" enough to be able to write instructions to us that would apply then, and to apply now???

Are you aware that the scriptures refer to television, helocopters, jets, etc?

Somewhat stunned,

Mike

 

[frewtloop]

I quoted it directly from Ch. 29:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He suffered upon it, because He consorted with and taught the poor and lowly, and found His disciples among the fishermen of Galilee and the despised publicans.

And omitted anything that preceded it.

Yes, I am picky about Jesus because there are so many counterfeit Christs out there.

So were the disciples, wanting to call down fire from heaven on someone once, criticizing on another occasion those who did things in Jesus' name but who were not part of their circle. Jesus' reply was to leave them alone, because "he who is not against us is for us." I find that a powerful statement, since we tend to put the opposite turn on it, "he who is not for us is against us," a totally different equation. Gamaliel gave advice to "leave these men alone, else ye may be found fighting against God." Seems to me His spectrum was always wider than the restraints humans try to impose upon them.
Speaking for myself only, I am content to let wheat and tares grow up together, there is certainly one wiser than I who will handle it.

TW

 

[frewtloop]

Friend, you are losing credibility fast.

And you are losing comprehension even faster.

Are you actually saying its "spin" to say that Almighty God knew there would be a 2004 and His scriptures apply in 2004, and that God is "smart" enough to be able to write instructions to us that would apply then, and to apply now???

This has absolutely zilch to do with what I actually did say. I simply pointed out the anachronism created by your insistence that the requirement for being "complete and thoroughly equipped" was, 66 books, OT and NT. Naturally, your insistence on that point rendered your definition null and void, as it would have involved Timothy, in his attempt to follow through on his mentor's exhortation, relying on the authority of several books that were not written yet, almost certainly including Hebrews and all five of John's writings.

I can only assume you are trying to detract or derail either me or this conversation, since your repeats of my comments are growing more and more incomprehensible, and have less and less resemblance to anything I have said.

Somewhat amused,

TW

 

[Marcia]

I am not advocating calling fire on anyone or doing anything to anyone, Worm. That is a straw man argument.

I am advocating only what the Bible advocates: to reject false teachings and hold to sound doctrine. To not do something that may cause a weaker brother to stumble. I think more than enough information has been posted here to show that Freemasonry violates these principles.

 

[frewtloop]

I got another email from that evil Kabalah:

Phonetic: " Be'oz'ney kseel al te'da'ber, kee ya'vooz le'se'chel mee'leicha. "

Translation: In the ears of a fool do not speak for he will scorn the wisdom of your words.

Meaning:

One of the most crucial things in conversation is measuring and knowing whether the 'vessel' of the listener - his capacity to listen, hear, comprehend and absorb, is adequate and ready to accept the words of the speaker.
When a listener is not ready for your words, instead of giving you a positive feedback he may try to defend himself and his ego by looking down upon you and your words, resulting in feelings of anger and insult in yourself.
Therefore, it would be to the benefit of the speaker to evaluate the listener ability of comprehension, and in case found insufficient - to stay silent or change the subject matter and his choice of words accordingly.

This one is actually the same thing contained in Proverbs 23:9, perhaps word for word, and is commentary upon it.

Evil stuff.

Just like those dirty rotten Masons.

TW

 

[Eladar]

Marcia,

How far must one go before one simply writes it off with "let those who have eyes see" and dust oneself off?