The Freemasons

Aquarius34 · 03-02-2013 11:21pm

A group to make contacts.

Absolam wrote: »

Repeating something over and over doesn't make it true, it just makes you sound like Dorethy.

Self denial isn't good either

Yeah clever with the rebuff there. Well not really... A cult is a cult. The truth is the truth and of course you are going to deny the truth because you are on the defense and you will remain on that side for as long as you're a Freemason. Of course you're going to deny this. I don't expect you to face the truth or accept the truth. It doesn't matter if it's repeated or not, the truth is the truth and nothing but the truth. All cults deny they are cults, especially the biggest ones. Scientologist's say the same thing, they are not a cult, but yet everyone who is not a Scientologist will agree that's it's a cult. Scientologists have their agenda and that is to spread their religion and give everyone the impression that it's all good, great and all that jazz. That's what cults do. They lie, deceive and the idea is to hone everyone and anyone to their way of thinking. Freemasonry is a cult, because the very definition of a cult is exactly what Freemasonry represents. They have rules and regulations, and in order to be apart of their society you have to abide by their rules.

It's like 99%percent of Alcoholics will deny they are alcoholics until the penny drops where they can't deny themselves any longer.

humanji · 04-02-2013 12:09am

Aquarius34 wrote: »

It's like 99%percent of Alcoholics will deny they are alcoholics until the penny drops where they can't deny themselves any longer.

You could easily be talking about yourself there.

You believe you are right, but that doesn't mean you are. It also doesn't mean you're wrong, but it's a good hint that you shouldn't treat people with disrespect because you don't understand where they're coming from.

Absolam · 04-02-2013 12:53am

A money making group.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

A cult is a cult. Freemasonry is a cult, because the very definition of a cult is exactly what Freemasonry represents.

OK, I'll throw you a bone and help you out a little here. Instead of clicking your heels and repeating yourself over and over, try demonstrating why what you say is true.

So, even though we're repeating what's been said in the thread already;
Definition of cult
noun
1a system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a particular figure or object:
a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members
a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular thing

Now I've given you one piece. All you need to do is demonstrate how the definition of a cult is exactly what Freemasonry represents. You could start by telling us what you think Freemasonry represents, and perhaps what you can prove Freemasonry represents.

Torakx · 04-02-2013 1:09am

Absolam wrote: »

a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange...

a relatively small group of people. check.. unless you have much greater numbers than what is expected.

having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange... check

We can argue semantics, but the requirement to believe in a higher power that is invisible would count as religious to me.
Not mentioning rituals or secrecy from the outside world.
It does seem like a cult.
While you might want to argue that, im sure you will.
I do believe the general idea of a cult seems to fit loosely at the least.
But its just a label to describe something.
End of the day Freemasonry speaks more or less for itself when it decides to open up some.

Its nowhere near as in your face a scientology.
Scientology you can see them coming a mile off.
Other cults and the one I have alot of experience with, you wont see them coming at all.

Im less concerned about pegging down labels though.

Absolam · 04-02-2013 2:46am

A money making group.

Well, I would certainly say that relative to other clubs/fraternities/societies Freemasonry can't be regarded as small.. there aren't a huge amount of clubs with millions of members worldwide, so you would really have to say a relatively quite large group of people really.

But my greatest objection would be the characterisation 'having religious beliefs or practices', entirely apart from the 'regarded by others as strange'.
Freemasonry has and espouses NO religious beliefs or practices; the requirement for members to have a belief in a supreme being doesn't endorse or proselytise the members beliefs; I would characterise Freemasonry as areligious, though theist. If you choose to regard the requirement of belief in a Supreme Being by members a religious belief in itself (I certainly don't), then you must admit belief in a Supreme Being is hardly strange; a very large proportion of the planet (and therefore other clubs/fraternities/societies) already hold that belief.

Aquarius34 · 04-02-2013 3:09am

A group to make contacts.

Absolam wrote: »

OK, I'll throw you a bone and help you out a little here. Instead of clicking your heels and repeating yourself over and over, try demonstrating why what you say is true.

So, even though we're repeating what's been said in the thread already;
Definition of cult
noun
1a system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a particular figure or object:
a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members
a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular thing

Now I've given you one piece. All you need to do is demonstrate how the definition of a cult is exactly what Freemasonry represents. You could start by telling us what you think Freemasonry represents, and perhaps what you can prove Freemasonry represents.

You see, people with a brain between their two ears, know what a cult is, and know Freemasonry is a cult. Freemasonry is the founding of what a cult is. It's not even a debate. It's hilarious seeing you trying to defend it.

Absolam · 04-02-2013 3:43am

A money making group.

Aquarius34 wrote: »

You see, people with a brain between their two ears, know what a cult is, and know Freemasonry is a cult. Freemasonry is the founding of what a cult is. It's not even a debate. It's hilarious seeing you trying to defend it.

So your evidence is; if you say so, then it is true. Now that's hilarious.

Aquarius34 · 04-02-2013 3:49am

A group to make contacts.

Absolam wrote: »

So your evidence is; if you say so, then it is true. Now that's hilarious.

Okay, then we should agree with you? even funnier. Yep agree with a Freemason who can't face up to the fact these lodges and secret societies are cults. But wait, I am sure we can then say no cult is a cult by your logic, because that's the way to go now. Let's say Scientology is not a cult sure and take the word cult of any group now. If Freemasonry ain't a cult, well we can then say there's no cult on Earth. We've got to make cults look better and more appeasing.

May as well drive backwards in future and say the river Nile flows upstream.

Don't we all love to live in denial about reality

Absolam · 04-02-2013 4:14am

A money making group.

Well, after such a cogent, specific, well reasoned argument, I'm convinced. You couldn't have done a better job of proving your point.

Torakx · 04-02-2013 5:38am

Absolam wrote: »

Well, I would certainly say that relative to other clubs/fraternities/societies Freemasonry can't be regarded as small.. there aren't a huge amount of clubs with millions of members worldwide, so you would really have to say a relatively quite large group of people really.

Ok now I am going to play chess for a little, to reflect the way I have recieved criticism on my views.
How about golf clubs?
They are not all associated, but they have golfing in common and I would say millions of members.Probably alot more than freemasons.
How about soccer clubs? same.
basketball? Fishing?
According to Robroy its all the same just a boys club.So we can use those to compare.
Freemasonry looks really strange compared to these fraternaties.
Oh women have their own versions too mind.There are womens golf clubs i hear ^^ can you believe!
Not like the old days eh?
So Ive established your club is small compared to similar clubs and that it is rather strange compared also.
Or should we compare it to the churches it takes its members from instead?

Its all relative and to people reading, its a matter of how you present your "case" rather than the actual reality of a situation.
So you see it one way and I may see it another way.
I was just playing chess so to speak.
Maybe ive over extended a gambit and will lose a knight or Bishop for that one.
Or maybe that is the real gambit.

ahhh, I really do miss playing chess lol

Absolam · 04-02-2013 6:53am

A money making group.

Fair enough, I'll bite :-)
Golf clubs are individual organisations and as far as I know don't have governing bodies, other than the R&A and the USGA who only set out rules and do not require membership of golf clubs. So as organisations each golf club could only be considered on a individual level.
If you take the interest itself as defining the organisation, meaning that golf players (or members of golf clubs) as a group are a large organisation then I would submit that the interests of Freemasonry are fraternity and charity, and therefore we can include all fraternal and charitable groups as part of the organisation, making Freemasonry an exceptionally large group indeed. But still, maybe not as big as soccer. Large enough anyway, not to be considered 'a relatively small group'.

As for being strange by comparison, that wasn't part of the definition. Still, I'll offer that Freemasonry is about as strange as spending large amounts of money and time on equipment and training to use a stick to knock a small ball into holes in a manmade landscape. Perhaps even a little less strange!

I'm entirely averse to comparing to religious organisations as Freemasonry is not a religion, and, even as above, whilst the primary interest of Churches is worship, this is not a primary interest of Freemasonry. I don't see anything comparable between religion and Freemasonry.

As you say, it depends on how you look at it. I can only offer my own perspective, and such insight as I have gained from being a member and an occasional (not very studious) student of the history and structure.

robroy1234 · 04-02-2013 10:54am

Conspiracy Theorists here need to calm down and chill out, and not be so paranoid and uptight. Aquarius you need to relax and enjoy life. It should be of no concern to you what I and my fella brethren choose to do in our own free time. If you believe that we are a cult, then you can believe that all you want - just don't try to force your opinions on others.

You should get out more, have a drink, meet a woman, visit places around Ireland, look at the countryside....enjoy life and be happy...

Torakx · 04-02-2013 1:16pm

Absolam wrote: »

Fair enough, I'll bite :-)
Golf clubs are individual organisations and as far as I know don't have governing bodies, other than the R&A and the USGA who only set out rules and do not require membership of golf clubs. So as organisations each golf club could only be considered on a individual level.

I was informed(by Robroy) this applies to Freemasonry also.
AFAIK the Irish lodges are not linked to the police lodge in North Wales for example(or any other lodge).I was told you do not have a governing body and that each lodge is a seperate unit within the general spectrum of Freemasonry.
Maybe not in those exact words, but that was the message and I didnt hear any arguement on it when it was used to dissuade my concerns.
Infact Golf clubs seem to have 2 bodies looking over them that Freemasonry does not have.Something I have no clue about really though.

Absolam wrote: »

If you take the interest itself as defining the organisation, meaning that golf players (or members of golf clubs) as a group are a large organisation then I would submit that the interests of Freemasonry are fraternity and charity, and therefore we can include all fraternal and charitable groups as part of the organisation, making Freemasonry an exceptionally large group indeed. But still, maybe not as big as soccer. Large enough anyway, not to be considered 'a relatively small group'.

I dont take interest alone as defining the organisation.
I will take membership though.
And just counting the USA, they may have enough golf club members to cover all the Freemasons worldwide.If not we could add another continent for good measure.
Freemasonry is not a charity, although it does take part in charity quite often.
Neither are they a golf club, but im sure members attend golf clubs.
I have an interest in Freemasonry, though I doubt it makes me a Freemason.

Absolam wrote: »

As for being strange by comparison, that wasn't part of the definition.

I believe it was.

Absolam wrote: »

Still, I'll offer that Freemasonry is about as strange as spending large amounts of money and time on equipment and training to use a stick to knock a small ball into holes in a manmade landscape. Perhaps even a little less strange!

I would be the first person to say that to me sports are a rather funny way to occupy ones time(in a serious manor).
Its supposed to be for fun or a distraction for the ignorant, however you wish to look at it.
Freemasonry you would claim im sure is nothing of the sort in those respects.

The definition of strange:
Unusual or surprising in a way that is unsettling or hard to understand.

I think its easy to understand all the practises of golf.They are considered normal because a majority have accepted it and understand for the most part its ways and practices.Its quite open, albeit membership can be strict in places.

Freemasonry is unusual to an outsider.
If a person completely ignorant of Freemasonry attended a ritual, they would certaily find it suprising and at the least very strange and hard to understand.
At a stretch and at times I would speculate unsettling (initiations).
I dont remember hearing golfers holding a golfclub to someones head and asking them to state a solemn oath unpon pain of death,should they break it.
Overall I feel secure in stating Freemasonry is quite strange.

Absolam wrote: »

I'm entirely averse to comparing to religious organisations as Freemasonry is not a religion, and, even as above, whilst the primary interest of Churches is worship, this is not a primary interest of Freemasonry. I don't see anything comparable between religion and Freemasonry.

Since were are defining so much.
Ritual:
Noun: A religious or solemn ceremony consisting of a series of actions performed according to a prescribed order.

Adjective
Of, relating to, or done as a religious or solemn rite: "ritual burial".

Synonyms
noun. rite - ceremony - ceremonial - observance - ordinanceadjective. ceremonial - ritualistic - sacral
Many of these words are also found in Freemasonry.

Religion:
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.

Details of belief as taught or discussed

Synonyms
faith - belief - creed - denomination

Rite:
A religious or other solemn ceremony or act: "the rite of communion"; "fertility rites"

A body of customary observances characteristic of a church or a part of it

ritual - ceremony - ceremonial - observance - ordinance

As you can plainly see, comparing Freemasonry to religion is not so much speculation as a need to find the closest description of its practices.

here is what google showed me to define "supreme being"
supreme being

Web definitions
God: the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of...

I could go on but i think that is enough to say, I am not stretching that far to compare Freemasonry to religion at all.

Absolam wrote: »

As you say, it depends on how you look at it. I can only offer my own perspective, and such insight as I have gained from being a member and an occasional (not very studious) student of the history and structure.

I do thank you for those insights, honestly.You do not owe me these conversations about your brotherhood.
And I have nothing to lose as you may in some respects.I appreciate that fully.

My overall point is that we can debate this till we grow old and die.
I can debate many things that are accepted.This does not change what IS.
I understand the need to defend your brotherhood from the association with certain taboo words.
I just cannot be a part of that.
I can sit back and be content to let you practise your "faith".Dont make me argue that word haha
But I cannot sit back and watch as pedophiles abuse children.It is the most hatefull crime I can imagine, to ruin a persons future when we have only one life to live.Its hard enough as it is.

My percieved attacks are not on members.
Its not even fully on the organisation with regards that gruesome topic.
Its about the pedo's getting away with what I would deem as a spiritual murder if you will.
My issue for now with Freemasonry as is with the cult I was a victim to, is the manor in which they handle this situation.
Aside from any other things I have issue with.

Anyway this type of debate is not preferable to me.
I much prefer a discussion and openness.
This maybe cannot be had when we are not at an equal standing(me not having a vested interest).
However I reserve the right to speak about these things here and would hope not to be molested with arguement over what is not a concern, but a distraction to my goals of rooting out pedophiles in government.

We can post pages of text which is required to meet your needs for this type of debate, but i think that is more suitable to somone who does not want readers to understand the information and discussion.

I can certainly say this wall of text was fun to write, in that it meets my needs for intellectual challenge to an extent.
But it serves no real usefull purpose only to toot my horn and allow us to continue a derail from my real concern.

robroy1234 · 04-02-2013 3:10pm

A lot of typing there - and alas don't really have the time nor the patience to read through it all.....

However I do need to point out that all lodges in Ireland are governed by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which covers the whole island of Ireland. We are not and never will have any adherence to any lodge and Grand Lodges in England, Wales, Scotland and US and other countries, even though we do visit them.

As for Golf - that is only brought up because many business and political deals are done on golf courses and the most recent and scandalous was the deal between Cowen and Fitzpatrick at Druids Glen the day before the Bank Guarantee scheme being announced. Yet not one conspiracy theorist has ever question these going ons and prefer to attack people with nothing to do with such carry ons.

For myself, Freemasonry is a fun pastime that gets me out of the house a few evenings a month, have a laugh and an occasional tipple.

Aquarius34 · 04-02-2013 3:15pm

A group to make contacts.

robroy1234 wrote: »

For myself, Freemasonry is a fun pastime that gets me out of the house a few evenings a month, have a laugh and an occasional tipple.

Wonderful and sounds all fluffy, light and grandeur.

But in reality that's not how Freemasonry and it's lodges are run. If that were the case, it wouldn't of lasted this long. I think the whole going back to the boozing again is the norm here now is it Robroy? It's all a laugh isn't it?

Sure if that's the case, we might as well all join so.

Torakx · 04-02-2013 7:29pm

robroy1234 wrote: »

A lot of typing there - and alas don't really have the time nor the patience to read through it all.....

However I do need to point out that all lodges in Ireland are governed by the Grand Lodge of Ireland, which covers the whole island of Ireland. We are not and never will have any adherence to any lodge and Grand Lodges in England, Wales, Scotland and US and other countries, even though we do visit them.

As for Golf - that is only brought up because many business and political deals are done on golf courses and the most recent and scandalous was the deal between Cowen and Fitzpatrick at Druids Glen the day before the Bank Guarantee scheme being announced. Yet not one conspiracy theorist has ever question these going ons and prefer to attack people with nothing to do with such carry ons.

For myself, Freemasonry is a fun pastime that gets me out of the house a few evenings a month, have a laugh and an occasional tipple.

I do understand your motivations.
When I stopped being a member of a cult, I lost all my friends except for two, who later followed me out.
Organisations have many pros and cons.

Absolam · 05-02-2013 12:17am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

I was informed(by Robroy) this applies to Freemasonry also.
AFAIK the Irish lodges are not linked to the police lodge in North Wales for example(or any other lodge).I was told you do not have a governing body and that each lodge is a seperate unit within the general spectrum of Freemasonry.
Maybe not in those exact words, but that was the message and I didnt hear any arguement on it when it was used to dissuade my concerns.
Infact Golf clubs seem to have 2 bodies looking over them that Freemasonry does not have.Something I have no clue about really though.

I think you're stretching yourself there... Robroy didn't say there are no governing bodies in Freemasonry. He has consistently pointed out that Irish Freemasonry is not English Freemasonry, and both of us have frequently referred to the Grand Lodges that regulate Freemasonry, including in answers to your own questions.
Whilst each jurisdiction of Freemasonry is regulated by its' own Grand Lodge, the same cannot be said of golf; the two bodies I mentioned publish rules for the game, but not for the clubs, nor do they regulate the clubs.

Torakx wrote: »

I dont take interest alone as defining the organisation.
I will take membership though.
And just counting the USA, they may have enough golf club members to cover all the Freemasons worldwide.If not we could add another continent for good measure.
Freemasonry is not a charity, although it does take part in charity quite often.
Neither are they a golf club, but I'm sure members attend golf clubs.
I have an interest in Freemasonry, though I doubt it makes me a Freemason.

That's fine by me, but you are then excluding golf from your argument. Membership of one golf club does not permit access to another, nor do individual golf clubs extend recognition (of handicaps, captaincies etc) to one another. However any Master Mason can visit any Lodge regulated by his own Grand Lodge, or any Lodge regulated by a Grand Lodge recognised by his Grand Lodge.
I'm not massively familiar with the USA, but I suspect you'll find there isn't a golf club in any State with as many members as the Grand Lodge (including its' subordinate Lodges) can claim.

Torakx wrote: »

I believe it was.

Definition of cult
noun
1a system of religious veneration and devotion directed towards a particular figure or object:
a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members
a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular thing
I think you'll find the definition was "having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange". That's not the same as "being strange by comparison".

Torakx wrote: »

As you can plainly see, comparing Freemasonry to religion is not so much speculation as a need to find the closest description of its practices.

Sorry.. I can't see the logic there. You've offered this definition of religion:
Religion:
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
Details of belief as taught or discussed
Synonyms
faith - belief - creed - denomination
None of which describes Freemasonry. Where is the comparison? Your definitions for ritual and rite both describe activities that are and aren't religious in nature; I accept that rituals and rites can be religious, but I also understand that there are rituals and rites that aren't.

Torakx wrote: »

here is what google showed me to define "supreme being"
supreme being
Web definitions
God: the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of...

Here's another...
Definition of supreme
adjective
1 highest in rank or authority:
2 very great or the greatest:
Definition of being
1 [mass noun] existence:
2 [in singular] the nature or essence of a person:
3a real or imaginary living creature or entity, especially an intelligent one

So I'm pretty happy with 'the very great or greatest real or imaginary living creature or entity, especially an intelligent one'.
Both work, imo, but neither ascribes a similarity between religions and Freemasonry.

Torakx wrote: »

I can debate many things that are accepted.This does not change what IS.
I understand the need to defend your brotherhood from the association with certain taboo words.
I just cannot be a part of that.
I can sit back and be content to let you practise your "faith".Dont make me argue that word haha

I don't think anyone has asked you to defend Freemasonry, and I'm happy you don't feel the need to persecute my 'faith'. As I've stated, my 'faith' is personal, and has nothing to do with Freemasonry, which is why I've refused to discuss it on this thread.

Torakx wrote: »

But I cannot sit back and watch as pedophiles abuse children.It is the most hatefull crime I can imagine, to ruin a persons future when we have only one life to live.Its hard enough as it is.

That's a laudable sentiment, one everyone should subscribe to. It's quite a non-sequitur to throw into a forum about Freemasonry though. Are you trying to somehow draw a connection between the two?

Torakx wrote: »

Its about the pedo's getting away with what I would deem as a spiritual murder if you will.

Again, I don't see the connection with this thread?

Torakx wrote: »

My issue for now with Freemasonry as is with the cult I was a victim to, is the manor in which they handle this situation. Aside from any other things I have issue with.

This might bear some explanation, as I can't really make sense of it?

Torakx wrote: »

However I reserve the right to speak about these things here and would hope not to be molested with arguement over what is not a concern, but a distraction to my goals of rooting out pedophiles in government.

I have to suggest that an internet thread about Freemasonry is not the best place to further a quest to root out paedophiles in government. And from a thread point of view, seems quite off-topic?

Torakx · 05-02-2013 1:22am

Not at all off topic.
If you scroll back most of your queries and comments have been covered.
Especially regarding pedophiles and Freemasons.
I can bring it all back up if you wish and revisit the conversation.

Granted you have bought an extra wall of text or two in relation to golf clubs on certain aspects of golf clubs.But then that is what I expected.
But I cant be bothered doing that all over again just to go back and forth to prove a point I feel I have made, that being the futility of this type of back and forth.
Its just arguing for the sake of it.
I had no intention of actually proving you belong to a religion.
I was making a point.
I need to hear an explanation for the rituals I witnessed first, before I commit to that.

Having secrets is a great way to keep on higher ground.
I can only speculate in some areas, where the rituals and initiation rituals are kept away from the outside world.
In my opinion cult like behaviour.
Maybe defining it as a cult is not perfect.
As i have never argued it was until I wanted to prove a point which is unrelated.

But that aside, I do think the rituals and closed doors and belief in a supreme being and/or Gods is very much like cult behaviour.
And nothing like a sports club.I never for a minute thought Freemasonry was anything like a golf club.
That would be ridiculous.

I used to refer to my former cult as a cult like religion, because it has about 8million members worldwide.
But its just easier and honest to call it a cult despite its massive numbers compared to smaller cults.
Obviously to anyone inside the cult, it would be laughable to inform them of their situation.
To them they are in "the truth".
And they can easily prove it using a bible and a couple of hours to wear you down.
As can be done on a forum.
You just need to keep at it.

I cant be arsed though lol
I wanted to jump in ahead of some other posters here and show the futility of arguing.

Ive already present some good info and sources which have been rejected due to bias and not on their merits alone.

People have read them.Thats all that matters.
I appreciate the replies though.
I just wish you would not cherry pick so much, as I have demonstrated by doing so myself not long ago.
I hope only to carry on a civil discussion and create awareness at the same time.
I am sure you will state the same and continue to defend your brethren.
Oh wait.Maybe you are only defending Irish Freemasons?

Aquarius34 · 05-02-2013 1:59am

A group to make contacts.

To say Freemasonry is not a cult, then it seems the whole term cult has to be re written and given a new meaning because if Freemasonry is not a cult, then what is a cult?

Absolam · 05-02-2013 5:13am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

Not at all off topic.
If you scroll back most of your queries and comments have been covered.
Especially regarding pedophiles and Freemasons.
I can bring it all back up if you wish and revisit the conversation.

Well, the presented topic was "What do you think the freemasons are really up to???". If you think the Freemasons are 'up to' paedophilia, then you're not off-topic (even if you're wrong about it). But you said "I cannot sit back and watch as pedophiles abuse children", "Its about the pedo's getting away with what I would deem as a spiritual murder", and "my goals of rooting out pedophiles in government". Those statements are about what you're up to, not Freemasons. Hence off-topic. There have certainly been plenty of posts attempting to link Freemasonry to paedophile rings, and that's par for the course, and I'm sure will continue to generate discussion.

Torakx wrote: »

I need to hear an explanation for the rituals I witnessed first, before I commit to that.

That's interesting. What rituals do you think you've witnessed?

Torakx wrote: »

Having secrets is a great way to keep on higher ground. I can only speculate in some areas, where the rituals and initiation rituals are kept away from the outside world. In my opinion cult like behaviour. Maybe defining it as a cult is not perfect. As i have never argued it was until I wanted to prove a point which is unrelated.

To be honest, I can't think of any person, or organisation, that doesn't have secrets of some sort or another, and very very few of them claim to be on 'higher ground'. And most of them wouldn't really be cults...

Torakx wrote: »

I used to refer to my former cult as a cult like religion, because it has about 8million members worldwide. But its just easier and honest to call it a cult despite its massive numbers compared to smaller cults. Obviously to anyone inside the cult, it would be laughable to inform them of their situation. To them they are in "the truth". And they can easily prove it using a bible and a couple of hours to wear you down. As can be done on a forum. You just need to keep at it.

As a matter of interest, what distinction do you make between a religion and a cult? I understand the word 'cult' is generally nowadays used pejoratively, but cult has long been a term associated with religion generally. Why not just call it a religion?

Torakx wrote: »

I hope only to carry on a civil discussion and create awareness at the same time. I am sure you will state the same and continue to defend your brethren. Oh wait.Maybe you are only defending Irish Freemasons?

I'm not particularly interested in creating awareness of Freemasonry, or in defending indefensible brethren. I am interested in correcting some of the ridiculous ideas put forward about Freemasonry, especially when it may help someone understand more and believe less. Hence, posting on a CT forum... the very land of ridiculous ideas.

robroy1234 · 05-02-2013 11:10am

In relation to rituals and rites, one has to consider that there are symbolic rituals to almost everything in life, from the mundane to the ridiculous. Again using the example of sports, we have the national anthem prior to International games in Soccer and Rugby, and every game in the GAA., to the All-Black performing the Haka. In ancient Celtic mythology and history the Celts had particular rituals and rites associated with a particular Geis, whether that would be a positive or negative. Individual and team sports people perform all sorts of rituals some as in a good luck wish to themselves, and a few hoping for divine intervention for success. I know a few sports people who wear an unwashed under-garment believing it to be lucky...albeit doesn't include the chances of jock-itch.

I find that the rituals people perform in everyday situations far more interesting in terms of behavioural psychology, such as a group of people in a meeting all sitting cross legged or arms folded, all sub-consciously peer compliance. And, sometimes we can mistakenly misread some rituals because of our own biases and prejudices, many people believe that when the Pope arrives at a country by plane and he bends down and kisses the ground - that he is symbolically blessing the earth of that country. It could be that he may be afraid of flying and is grateful to getting back down on to the ground.

Torakx · 05-02-2013 1:18pm

Thats exactly my point Robroy regardng rituals.How do I know its not relating to a supernatural deity or have religious notes?
I dont yet, unless I take the word of the supposed Freemasons here.
And so far you two have demonstrated bias towards these discussions.
I know i have to a degree.But you would not believe me anyway so thats probably irrelevant.

To Absolam

I may have used witness a bit liberally

I have seen a ritual or two but not in person of course.
You seem confident though that I would not have witnessed one.
Maybe the Tyler's are very good at their job.
Or maybe one of those rituals were fake.It looked quite genuine.

On the matter of labeling my former cult as a cult and not a religion as they claim.
That is because of the segregation and being somewhat closed off from society.
You would never know it existed unless you actually were associating with them for a while, by then you are probably already trapped psychologically.
They have a herd like attitude and anyone not in the herd is seen as different to them.
You are correct in my oppinion about the use of the word however.
There are bands who have a "cult" following.
Do you think the fans believe the band is God? I dont, although they might aswell.

In this manor I refer to my former cult and would argue Freemasonry goes hand in hand.
However I am not so much worried about labels as you.Understandably, as it is you who is within this society, not me.
When you live your life according to the practises and beliefs of a society, you might aswell call it a religion or cult for the behaviour is dictates.

Here is what I have gathered more or less about Freemasons so far.

Freemasons are somewhat a closed society and somewhat secretive.

Freemasons carry out rituals in secret.Secret, as in meaning behind doors, where anyone not a Freemason would not be permitted.

A masonic initiation is carried out with a sword to the chest and the supplicant blindfolded on his knees.

Freemasons proclaim to be a fraternal order that is generally focused on charity work and bettering themselves.

Freemasons take an oath to join the society/fraternity.
This Oath is secret, unless you wish to tell me it now.

One of the Freemasons top rules or regulations, is that every member believes in a supreme being.
To me this means its highly likely that Freemasons allow satanic worshippers and Luciferians to join the fraternity.

Lastly I came across an interesting comment from a supposed Freemason.
It was in reply to a questioon on the motto of Freemasons.

First of all the idea that there is a singular "Freemason motto" is laughable.
Freemasonry consists of so many different organizations it's got many, many mottoes and slogans and signs and symbols and handshakes and passwords that it would take years to learn them all even if they were freely available.
However, I can give you some examples of various "mottoes."
Regular masons (blue lodge, craft lodge, symbolic lodge) - Ordo ab Chao - Order from Chaos
Capitular Masonry (York Rite degrees above blue lodge) - Kodesh Layehovah - Holiness to the Lord
Order of the Red Cross (degree below Knight Templar) - Magna est Veritas, et praevalabit - Great is truth, and it will prevail!
Knights Templar (Highest degree in York Rite) - In hoc signo vinces - By this sign thou shalt conquer
Scottish Rite - Lux e tenebris - Light out of darkness
Scottish Rite 14º - Virtus junxit, mors non separabit - Virtue has united, death shall not separate
Scottish Rite 30° - Ne plus ultra - Nothing more beyond
Scottish Rite 32° - Spes mea in Deo est - My hope is in God
Scottish Rite 33° - Deus meumque Jus - God and my right
Scottish Rite Southern Jurisdiction (USA) - Dieu et mon Droit - God and my right
The "motto" to which you refer is actually a bastardization of some of the words from the Coat of Arms of the United Grand Lodge of England. "Audi, Vide, Tace" which is abreviated from "Audi, vide, tace, si vis vivere in pace" "Hear, see, be silent, if you would live in peace."

I hope you two will comment on anything that is not true according to your belief or knowledge.

Torakx · 05-02-2013 1:27pm

Sorry I forgot the video of the ritual I mentioned earlier.
Again my apologies for saying I witnessed this.
You could say I witnessed the videofootage I suppose...but anyway.
My english is sub par, as I am self taught from my mid teens.Funnily enough I chose to be an apprentice instead of schooling haha.My initiation was not so intense though and I am not tied to any oaths.
Hopefully I can still be understood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtBT5gthmA8

Absolam · 05-02-2013 2:47pm

A money making group.

That's quite a long post, but I'll try to address as many points as I can... making for an even longer post.

Torakx wrote: »

I may have used witness a bit liberally I have seen a ritual or two but not in person of course. You seem confident though that I would not have witnessed one. Maybe the Tyler's are very good at their job. Or maybe one of those rituals were fake.It looked quite genuine.

My point was, not knowing what you were seeing, you might assume something you were seeing was a Masonic ritual, when it was not.
With regard to the video you posted, I'm afraid I can't shed much light on it.
The regalia being worn looks Masonic to me. The music sounds Masonic. The room, furniture and layout look very close to Masonic, and probably are, perhaps from a constitution I'm not familiar with. However, the hand gestures are unfamiliar, there are women present, and the doors at the back open and close, which says it's not a regular Masonic Lodge, or at least, the ceremony taking place is not whilst a Lodge is in session.
The video is entitled 'Start of the Consecration Ceremony'. When a new Lodge is Constituted, there is a Consecration Ceremony. Before leaping to any conclusions, this is not a religious consecration; the term consecration means that the Lodge has been declared to be dedicated, or set apart, for Masonic purposes. A formal declaration of the birth of the Lodge, if you like. These are very rare occurances, and I have been lucky enough to participate in one. Corn, oil, and wine are presented in the ceremony representing food for the hungry, soothing for the ill, and cheer for the sorrowful, to remind the constituting Masons of their duties to their fellow man. I'm mentioning this because that might be what's on the table being uncovered as he moves about. It's not a Consecration Ceremony for an Irish Lodge, but it might possibly be one from another Constitution.

Torakx wrote: »

On the matter of labeling my former cult as a cult and not a religion as they claim. That is because of the segregation and being somewhat closed off from society. You would never know it existed unless you actually were associating with them for a while, by then you are probably already trapped psychologically. They have a herd like attitude and anyone not in the herd is seen as different to them. You are correct in my oppinion about the use of the word however. There are bands who have a "cult" following. Do you think the fans believe the band is God? I dont, although they might aswell.

My point really was Mithraism was a cult, Christianity was a cult. Cults are religions, or at least the practice and observance that is the active part of religions. I don't see a great need to create such a distinction between religions.

Torakx wrote: »

In this manor I refer to my former cult and would argue Freemasonry goes hand in hand. However I am not so much worried about labels as you.Understandably, as it is you who is within this society, not me. When you live your life according to the practises and beliefs of a society, you might aswell call it a religion or cult for the behaviour is dictates.

Again, I can't see where you draw any parallells. Freemasons aren't segregated, or closed off from society. There is no herd like attitude; Freemasons don't see non Freemasons as different from them. Nor does Freemasonry dictate behaviour.

Torakx wrote: »

Here is what I have gathered more or less about Freemasons so far.
Freemasons are somewhat a closed society and somewhat secretive.

Freemasons are a private organisation, but membership is open to anyone meeting the criteria, so not closed, and not a society in the context of 'closed society'. Freemasonry is a society with secrets. But only secretive about the secrets. Otherwise pretty public.

Torakx wrote: »

Freemasons carry out rituals in secret.Secret, as in meaning behind doors, where anyone not a Freemason would not be permitted.

Freemasons meet in private, and carry out rituals at those meetings. It's a more accurate description.
For example, people often have sex in private. Mostly. But not so often in secret. I hope that shows the distinction. I'm not saying Freemasons have sex at meetings, in case that crossed your mind.

Torakx wrote: »

A masonic initiation is carried out with a sword to the chest and the supplicant blindfolded on his knees.

Close, but not true. At points in a Masonic initiation, a candidate will be blindfolded, may kneel to pray, and will have a dagger placed to his chest. I'm sure this will provide some entertaining speculation!

Torakx wrote: »

Freemasons proclaim to be a fraternal order that is generally focused on charity work and bettering themselves.

Freemasonry is a fraternal organisation with the aim of making good men better. Charitable work is usual and considered laudable.

Torakx wrote: »

Freemasons take an oath to join the society/fraternity. This Oath is secret, unless you wish to tell me it now.

Freemasons take an oath on recieving each of their Degrees. The oaths are not secret. However, we're not obliged to tell anyone what they are either.

Torakx wrote: »

One of the Freemasons top rules or regulations, is that every member believes in a supreme being. To me this means its highly likely that Freemasons allow satanic worshippers and Luciferians to join the fraternity.

A requirement for joining Freemasonry is that candidates must profess a belief in a Supreme Being. Yes, that means satanic worshippers and Luciferians satisfy that requirement (as far as I know they believe Satan/Lucifer is a supreme being). Will that cause more or less commentary than the initiation do you think?

Torakx wrote: »

Lastly I came across an interesting comment from a supposed Freemason. It was in reply to a questioon on the motto of Freemasons.

Lots of Lodges adopt mottoes, but there is no overarching Masonic Motto.
The list you were provided is York Rite; an American form of Freemasonry.
But to add to it, the motto on the crest of the Grand Lodge of Ireland is 'Fiat Lux Et Facta Est Lux', 'Let There Be Light And There Was Light'.

So, I've explained some, and given you some things to get agitated about if you like. Hopefully, nothing that convinces you that paedophilia is an agenda item at Masonic meetings.

Torakx · 05-02-2013 3:15pm

Thank you.
As honest and open a response as I could have expected.
A better way to disarm me

and i dont begrudge it either lol

I actually laughed out loud when you mentioned having sex in the lodge during meetings.

Do you refer to them as meetings within the group and amongst peers?
That is how I used to refer to our "mass", in the cult I was in.
Im just noting that its interesting about the cult I was in that proclaims to be a religion, yet calls its association for spiritual food as "meetings".
Seems strange, but maybe there is good reason.
They also refer to everyone as brother this and sister that.
But this is typical of religions I suppose.And I will include fraternities before you presume too much

You have some interesting points made on the video.Some things I had not considered.
I am very interested to know what exactly the movements and setting of the table means.Pretty much a step by step of every symbolic representation.Might be asking too much, especially if you do not recognise the ceremony fully.
But that was what I was hoping for in the end.

I am well aware of symbolism.It rules my life and I would say everyone elses whether they know it or not.
The sword to the chest I am guessing is symbolic of the seriousness of the oath and the need to be silent.
The blindfold obviously indicates a lack of vision and knowledge.

However an oath IS taken.And while you say it is not a secret and that the blade to the chest is symbolic, its quite interesting that I am finding it hard to get information on what that oath pertains to.

A bit of a strange question here.
Do you know of any other groups of people that keep an oath but never divulge it to outsiders?

robroy1234 · 05-02-2013 5:11pm

I can't really get the whole video and view it in full, but, it is definitely not the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE) main Grand Lodge room, however it could be a one of the smaller lodge rooms. I have been to the UGLE a few times and the only time women and non-Masons have been allowed in was when the lodge has been closed (not in session) and then reopen when they have left. Therefore any signs, words, rituals used would invalidate this being an English, Irish or Scottish lodge. Also the aprons mean that this is not an Irish lodge. In the US, most lodges do not always wear suits, and the WM wears a hat - same applies in the Caribbean, but no women present. This leaves the only option being the French Orient which allows women.

robroy1234 · 05-02-2013 5:15pm

Torakx- I do know a group that have secrets and never divulge them and that is of course Athletics - I have ran internationally for over 2 decades as well as coaching., and there are not a more secretive and elitist bunch of people in the world than International Athletes.

Torakx · 05-02-2013 5:37pm

robroy1234 wrote: »

Torakx- I do know a group that have secrets and never divulge them and that is of course Athletics - I have ran internationally for over 2 decades as well as coaching., and there are not a more secretive and elitist bunch of people in the world than International Athletes.

Do you mean secrets of the "trade"/profession?
Or stuff like steroid use?

I was aiming for something along the lines of the former.
Also I did say oath and not secret alone.Many people have secrets.
So I guess I mean oath.
Just to be clear lol il repost the question, as it was better put.

Do you know of any other groups of people that keep an oath but never divulge it to outsiders?

Absolam · 06-02-2013 12:04am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

Do you refer to them as meetings within the group and amongst peers? That is how I used to refer to our "mass", in the cult I was in. Im just noting that its interesting about the cult I was in that proclaims to be a religion, yet calls its association for spiritual food as "meetings". Seems strange, but maybe there is good reason. They also refer to everyone as brother this and sister that. But this is typical of religions I suppose.And I will include fraternities before you presume too much

Yes they are meetings, they have agendas and minutes etc so pretty much just like any other organisational meeting.

Torakx wrote: »

You have some interesting points made on the video.Some things I had not considered. I am very interested to know what exactly the movements and setting of the table means.Pretty much a step by step of every symbolic representation.Might be asking too much, especially if you do not recognise the ceremony fully. But that was what I was hoping for in the end.

Unfortunately, the movements, hand signals, and setting of the table aren't familiar to me, so I can't really comment, other than if there are only three 'vessels' on the table, I would assume from the apparent context that they contain corn, oil, and wine as I said above. Even on that I could be wrong; like I said the video doesn't match the constitution ceremony I participated in.

Torakx wrote: »

I am well aware of symbolism.It rules my life and I would say everyone elses whether they know it or not. The sword to the chest I am guessing is symbolic of the seriousness of the oath and the need to be silent.
The blindfold obviously indicates a lack of vision and knowledge.

Symbolism is important in Freemasonry, although it doesn't rule anyones' life. The symbology isn't neccasarily obvious as it may appear though. The dagger is symbolic of memory and conscience. The blindfold is symbolic of trust and the lack of a candidates knowledge of Freemasonry.

Torakx wrote: »

However an oath IS taken.And while you say it is not a secret and that the blade to the chest is symbolic, its quite interesting that I am finding it hard to get information on what that oath pertains to.

Absolutely, an oath is taken. A quick google will show you hundreds of versions of the oaths, some more accurate than others. So it's not at all hard to get information on it.

Torakx wrote: »

A bit of a strange question here.
Do you know of any other groups of people that keep an oath but never divulge it to outsiders?

The vast majority of American College Fraternities and Sororities take oaths on joining, and they're probably divulged to a similar extent as Masonic oaths I should think.

robroy1234 · 06-02-2013 12:25am

I was invited many times to join a few fraternities at University in the States and was a member Phi Kappa Delta at College in California, but this was an academic fraternity and required no oaths or rituals. However the two I was invited to consisted of various rituals, rites, oaths and something that is trying to be outlawed, but still continues, and that is Hazing. I didn't have the time, or patience to join these frats and they had the problems of too much alcohol consumption, violence and getting in the way of academics and athletics. Some University Fraternities are notorious such as the Skull and Bones, and others less known.

robroy1234 · 06-02-2013 12:26am

I somewhat remember that the Fraternity I was a member off required one to know the entire Greek Alphabet from memory...

Brown Bomber · 06-02-2013 1:34am

A group to make contacts.

robroy1234 wrote: »

- I have ran internationally for over 2 decades

:eek: You must be shattered!

Torakx · 06-02-2013 4:35am

LOL BrownBomber, indeed 2 decades is a long time to be running!
I want to know did he run on the boat over seas too or take the tunnel.

RobRoy I would consider some fo those fraternaties as dodgey myself.
Obviously Skull&Bones.
I see them as a way for people to be recruited for many purposes other than fraternal.
Maybe the bussiness aspect is a consequence of the nature of those fraternities.
But I suspect many know already before joining that they will most likely have good bussiness contacts and be setup if they tow the line.

I would imagine that many try to join Freemasonry for exactly the same reason.
Otherwise they are joining for charity? fellowship?
These are things you can find anywhere.
Do they do it to become better men?
Im not sure about that either.
I want to become better.But i feel it silly to rely on an organisation to dictate to me morals or anything really.
I can join a casual club for sports or chess etc if I want fellowship.
So im sure its understandable why people suspect Freemasonry is more than just fellowship and charity and making yourself a better man.

Absolam,I could do a quick google for some oaths.
I could also do a quick google for some beliefs.
But anything I find will be contested if its not acceptable to be associated with it.
So asking me to google something is a little hypocritical I think, or unfair..whatever word suits there.
It is you who knows the oath you took.Google could give me many and who knows which is real and made up.
In that respect it is very hard to get information on it.Extremely hard.
If its so easily divulged you would have just came out and told me one you know is a real oath.
And I would take it with a pinch of salt, but for sure consider it as more than likely true.
Nothing stppping you from lying though lol...or sayying your a mason when your not.
But I dont wish to debate that when it is pointless.
We can make do as is

I have doubts as to my ability to get the oath for Skull&Bones aswell.
I could google it, but that can be fobbed off as speculative at best.

So far I think we have found just,or mainly, fraternal orders having secret oaths.
Or if you rather, oaths that are not so easily known or verifiable outside of the order they were taken.

As Robroy mentioned(regarding the video posted) maybe it is one of the foreign lodges.
The orient? I thought i read mentioned.
I somehow had not noticed women there or the doors open.But then I am a newbie to these rituals.That was the first one I saw.

I would be interested in finding a video of a ritual that one of you or both recognise, so we could maybe talk about it and discuss the symbolic significance of it.
There were other videos on youtube which i havent looked at yet.
Just that one posted and the turkish sounding one with the sword to the chest is all I have watched so far.
Tomorrow I may look more carefully.

Absolam · 06-02-2013 5:22am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

Absolam,I could do a quick google for some oaths.
I could also do a quick google for some beliefs. But anything I find will be contested if its not acceptable to be associated with it. So asking me to google something is a little hypocritical I think, or unfair..whatever word suits there. It is you who knows the oath you took.Google could give me many and who knows which is real and made up. In that respect it is very hard to get information on it.Extremely hard. If its so easily divulged you would have just came out and told me one you know is a real oath. And I would take it with a pinch of salt, but for sure consider it as more than likely true. Nothing stppping you from lying though lol...or sayying your a mason when your not.
But I dont wish to debate that when it is pointless.
We can make do as is

Absolutely true; my suggestion that you google it was to give you a flavour of the sort of content that is consistent in all versions out there. With regard to the oath I took, there is no rule or obligation to keep me from sharing it. However, it is my oath, an undertaking I didn't make lightly, and that I treat seriously, as with all promises I make. Since it's personal to me, it's not something I'm inclined to share on an internet forum, sorry.

Torakx · 06-02-2013 5:27am

Absolam wrote: »

Absolutely true; my suggestion that you google it was to give you a flavour of the sort of content that is consistent in all versions out there. With regard to the oath I took, there is no rule or obligation to keep me from sharing it. However, it is my oath, an undertaking I didn't make lightly, and that I treat seriously, as with all promises I make. Since it's personal to me, it's not something I'm inclined to share on an internet forum, sorry.

I expected no less!!
Except that you would be asleep at this crazy hour.This time is for crazy CTers like myself you know.
I hope my comments arent keeping you away from pleasant dreams hehe.

Im sure too that RobRoy would not like to share his oath either.
Perhaps you know of an oath that other lodges require?
Maybe in other countries, far from here and any connections with yourself.
For your peace of mind.

robroy1234 · 06-02-2013 10:48am

Some oaths are made public, like that of a President when being sworn in, whereas some oaths are taken in secret. But, it doesn't really matter where and when these oaths are taken, what really matters is whether the person making them adheres to the oath that is made. If you look at the American Presidents who have been very much ardent at making their particular oath as public, and yet do not adhere to their constitution as they pledged to do. Therefore bringing into public whatever oath someone makes pales in significance if that oath is not taken seriously. Now, I take my oath very seriously as it is between me and my supreme being (note that I did not say lodge - and there is a reason for that), and it is the same oath I took when I got married to my gorgeous wife (my bias there).

Torakx · 06-02-2013 4:05pm

robroy1234 wrote: »

Some oaths are made public, like that of a President when being sworn in, whereas some oaths are taken in secret. But, it doesn't really matter where and when these oaths are taken, what really matters is whether the person making them adheres to the oath that is made. If you look at the American Presidents who have been very much ardent at making their particular oath as public, and yet do not adhere to their constitution as they pledged to do. Therefore bringing into public whatever oath someone makes pales in significance if that oath is not taken seriously. Now, I take my oath very seriously as it is between me and my supreme being (note that I did not say lodge - and there is a reason for that), and it is the same oath I took when I got married to my gorgeous wife (my bias there).

I have no doubts at all that most Freemasons take their oath very seriously.
I also have no doubts that the American president and probably all presidents or most others, do not take their oath seriously in the slightest.
I presume as soon as they take it they run to the whitehouse to break it, maybe even literally.
Money does some strange things to sick people.I mean sickness of the mind of course,relating to greed,power,plundering, when they have more than they need already.
Its dangerous to society, I hope most would agree.

You might be able to understand my curiosity on the oath of Freemasons.
Im told its not a secret oath.But it is taken in secret.
I can inquire as to what the oath is at a lodge or any masonic body, but they will not inform me of it.

All the members I have communicated with to date do not wish to enlighten me in this regard.
For all that is said, it is as good as a secret.

The thing about the presidents oaths and other public ones, is that it is transparent and because oaths are very important, it is important that the supposed representative of the body the oath hailed from speaks it publically so the public know what his commitments are.

I do not know for sure what Freemasons are really about.
They are quite secretive and so the oath that appears to be secreted seems like a big deal to me.
Especially since all members are required to believe in a supreme being.

This means to me, they are in many respects lowering themselves before a higher power and are not fully independant of mind.
Anyone not independant of mind is in some manor vunerable to being a party to somebody elses agenda.

This isnt to say the masonic agenda is malicious or negative to the outside world.
But there is no proof I have seen yet to show it isnt either.

Thank you though for giving me at least some hint about the nature of the oath.
I did not realise that and it is very telling if applicable to all members as a rule or standard.
I would love to know more about that aspect if possible.
If not I guess I will have to try do some digging at some stage.

robroy1234 · 06-02-2013 5:16pm

The Masonic oath is just like any other oath, one just pledges to be faithful, honest and respectful. Like the oath of the President we do so on the bible (or whatever religious book that is the accepted religion chosen). Even though we take it seriously I wouldn't get too caught up in it - it is not exactly life or death scenario.

Torakx · 06-02-2013 5:58pm

robroy1234 wrote: »

The Masonic oath is just like any other oath, one just pledges to be faithful, honest and respectful. Like the oath of the President we do so on the bible (or whatever religious book that is the accepted religion chosen). Even though we take it seriously I wouldn't get too caught up in it - it is not exactly life or death scenario.

What do Athiest Freemasons swear on?

Absolam · 06-02-2013 10:08pm

A money making group.

Freemasonry requires a belief in a Supreme Being, so there are no atheist candidates. Agnostics swear on their honour, or in a way that they deem to be binding on their conscience.

Torakx · 07-02-2013 12:48am

Absolam wrote: »

Freemasonry requires a belief in a Supreme Being, so there are no atheist candidates. Agnostics swear on their honour, or in a way that they deem to be binding on their conscience.

Now im confused again lol

Going back to our earlier conversation on supreme being.
Your view on it was this.

Here's another...
Definition of supreme
adjective
1 highest in rank or authority:
2 very great or the greatest:
Definition of being
1 [mass noun] existence:
2 [in singular] the nature or essence of a person:
3a real or imaginary living creature or entity, especially an intelligent one

So I'm pretty happy with 'the very great or greatest real or imaginary living creature or entity, especially an intelligent one'.

Then can an Athiest believe in the very greatest known living scientist of great intelligence,who was or is a living creature for example and still reach the requirements?
What is it about an Athiest that makes them unsuitable?
Surely you can make good men of them too.
Maybe under these conditions you actually can join as an athiest, its just very rare right?

Otherwise it seems unfair that because someone does not believe in arguably imaginary beings they cannot join.
I would think too that swearing an oath on a known personage of supreme authority would be much more reliable than swearing on somethign that may not even exist and bears no consequences for breaking your oath, only those you give it.

For these reasons I still have some doubts about the actual reasons for the supreme being belief.
Or have I discovered a loophole and it is just dealth by blackballing anyone who does not believe in an entity that is invisible and possibly imaginary.

Absolam · 07-02-2013 1:39am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

Then can an Athiest believe in the very greatest known living scientist of great intelligence,who was or is a living creature for example and still reach the requirements?

Well, firstly he wouldn't believe in the scientist, he would know about the scientist. A profession of belief to my mind requires some sort of faith, as opposed to knowledge. However, if he believes the scientist is a/the supreme being, then he's not an atheist, and satisfies the requirement. Obviously you can play with words Believe, Supreme, and Being, and create interesting sophistic arguments. An atheist who wants to be a member and tries that simply won't meet the requirement. An atheist who lies and professes a belief will pass the requirement. Unfortunate, but true.

Torakx wrote: »

What is it about an Athiest that makes them unsuitable?
Surely you can make good men of them too.
Maybe under these conditions you actually can join as an athiest, its just very rare right?

What makes them unsuitable is they don't profess a belief in a supreme being. Certainly, there must be many good men who are atheists, who are capable of being better. But they can't become Freemasons. Or maybe I should say Regular Freemasons. Which are, of course, the only proper Freemasons

Torakx wrote: »

Otherwise it seems unfair that because someone does not believe in arguably imaginary beings they cannot join.
I would think too that swearing an oath on a known personage of supreme authority would be much more reliable than swearing on somethign that may not even exist and bears no consequences for breaking your oath, only those you give it.

. It does seem unfair, particularly in a modern secular society. Presumably, that's why secular Irregular Lodges were formed, which allow atheist members. I'm not sure how swearing an oath on a known personage of supreme authority is in any way more reliable though, unless that person is present to witness and exact consequences?

Torakx wrote: »

For these reasons I still have some doubts about the actual reasons for the supreme being belief.
Or have I discovered a loophole and it is just dealth by blackballing anyone who does not believe in an entity that is invisible and possibly imaginary.

. I don't think invisibility was mentioned as a criteria. The potential non-existance of any given supreme being is not something we tend to worry about. I also think you may be putting too much emphasis on one entrance criteria; it's not like someone can argue their case for their belief in a visible and tangible supreme being, and his scrutinisers report to the Lodge 'his logic was impeccable, we could not rebuff his argument. Sorry, we have to put him forward, and you'll just have to blackball him instead'. More likely they'll report back 'we met this guy who was mad for arguing about supreme beings and religious stuff. We don't think he'll be a good member, so we're not putting him forward'.

Torakx · 07-02-2013 1:58am

Yeah sorry, I am to an extent, pulling everything apart to look at it.
Thats my learning process I suppose.
I can never have too much info and then ussually its not enough haha
I would say im Agnostic myself.

I think the supreme being criteria gets me, because you say its not a religion, which I can believe may be true and is probably very likely.

But when I think about the overall picture, it seems to be a society that requires its members to believe in something I would consider not real.
And my intuition is telling me there is a reason this is part of the foundations, that may be apart from the idea it is just about earlier fear of immoral characters like atheists of the past(in a predominantly religious world) entering the fold.

This may be some bias rearing is head.
And intuition is based on past experience and your unconscious thoughts.
But I would explore that further, if I can, to be sure.

Absolam · 07-02-2013 2:36am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

But when I think about the overall picture, it seems to be a society that requires its members to believe in something I would consider not real.
And my intuition is telling me there is a reason this is part of the foundations, that may be apart from the idea it is just about earlier fear of immoral characters like atheists of the past(in a predominantly religious world) entering the fold. This may be some bias rearing is head. And intuition is based on past experience and your unconscious thoughts. But I would explore that further, if I can, to be sure.

That's a fair point, but all it really means is Freemasonry is an organisation that you wouldn't like to be part of, which is perfectly valid. There is certainly a bias; Freemasonry is biased towards people who profess a belief in a Supreme Being. It's not neccasarily a logical, or even needful bias. It exists, and the current membership are happy to keep it, so it continues.

Torakx · 07-02-2013 4:06am

Maybe that is all it amounts to.
But, supposing you wanted to control people in some way.

Maybe it is there to make sure all members are sympathetic to religion.
I am for a minute thinking of a CT, that the Freemasons were created by the Vatican.
Something I dont think I have really looked into or maybe at all.
Do you think in theory it would have been possible?
Im not saying likely....But possible?

And right now im asking myself why would they do that.
One motive off the top of my head would be a need to control other religions or infiltrate them maybe.
Or setup a one world religion for a future date or next age of enlightenment.
See the age of aquarius thread maybe for inspiration hehe.

In a book I read called "The Secret History Of The World" if I remember correctly, the writer was saying that Freemasonry was in opposition to the church at the time.
I hope i am remembering that correctly from the book.

The writer claimed his source was a contact from within Freemasonry, but I really doubt that.
It was an interesting read though.Very speculative in many parts I would imagine too.

Absolam · 07-02-2013 5:02am

A money making group.

Torakx wrote: »

Maybe that is all it amounts to.
But, supposing you wanted to control people in some way.
Maybe it is there to make sure all members are sympathetic to religion.
I am for a minute thinking of a CT, that the Freemasons were created by the Vatican. Something I dont think I have really looked into or maybe at all.
Do you think in theory it would have been possible? Im not saying likely....But possible?

Ensuring that members are sympathetic to religion, or at least faith, would certainly have been beneficial to the Freemasons early on, when the Church wielded so much temporal power and being seen to be overtly sympathetic would have been good protection from denunciation. But the flip side is that back then there was no need to ensure it, as there was no substantial non-religious position; only variations on religious positions, and Freemasonry was open to all variations.
Of course most things are possible; taking that line you might say the Vatican created the Reformation and Protestantism to keep people sympathetic to Christianity. It's possible, just very improbable. The Catholic Church has repeatedly taken positions against Freemasonry; possibly that's a double blind to make it appear they're against Freemasonry when they secretly support it. But you could say the same about Protestantism, abortion, contraception etc etc. They're all improbabilities.

Torakx wrote: »

And right now im asking myself why would they do that.
One motive off the top of my head would be a need to control other religions or infiltrate them maybe. Or setup a one world religion for a future date or next age of enlightenment. See the age of aquarius thread maybe for inspiration hehe.

I can't really see why the Catholic Church would want to infiltrate or control other religions... what benefit would accrue? The idea of secretly creating a one world religion seems to ignore the fact that there are people involved; once their religion moved sufficiently away from their personal faith position people would leave and start their own version of the religion, which is why we have so many variants of the major religions today. Schism would constantly prevent a one world religion.

Torakx wrote: »

In a book I read called "The Secret History Of The World" if I remember correctly, the writer was saying that Freemasonry was in opposition to the church at the time. I hope i am remembering that correctly from the book.
The writer claimed his source was a contact from within Freemasonry, but I really doubt that. It was an interesting read though.Very speculative in many parts I would imagine too.

I don't know the book, or the time being discussed. Probably more accurate to say that the Catholic Church has opposed Freemasonry. Freemasonry doesn't take a position on religion, either to endorse or oppose. There may have been a point in history where one Grand Lodge or another opposed the Catholic Church on some point, but I'm not aware of it, and I think it's highly unlikely.

robroy1234 · 07-02-2013 9:31am

Torakx - I relation to the Atheist and the Supreme Being - you could actually visualize that the Supreme Being as Energy. Energy as a scientific concept does and can fit the requirement as the Supreme Being.

Yitzhak Rabin · 07-02-2013 2:41pm

A money making group.

robroy1234 wrote: »

Torakx - I relation to the Atheist and the Supreme Being - you could actually visualize that the Supreme Being as Energy. Energy as a scientific concept does and can fit the requirement as the Supreme Being.

I joined with a belief similar to this. I explained it in detail either in this thread or another freemasonry one a few years ago.

King Mob · 07-02-2013 2:45pm

robroy1234 wrote: »

Torakx - I relation to the Atheist and the Supreme Being - you could actually visualize that the Supreme Being as Energy. Energy as a scientific concept does and can fit the requirement as the Supreme Being.

I'm not sure how this makes sense. Surely "being" implies some sort of intelligence or will does it not?

What are the requirements for a Supreme Being?

Attabear · 07-02-2013 2:56pm

A money making group.

King Mob wrote: »

I'm not sure how this makes sense. Surely "being" implies some sort of intelligence or will does it not?

What are the requirements for a Supreme Being?

It seems that the requirement is to profess belief in a supreme being.

You wont have to quantify this being or indeed qualify your belief.

The flying spaghetti monster would suffice.

This is my reading and is not any way authoritative.:)

The Freemasons

Comments