Ask a mason anything you want to know!

[kamaeq]

The scripture says so. Society has lulled believers into accepting broad general oaths that they can never truly keep nor finish as they do not understand that by swearing it on the Bible that they are going to do something without God's help. It is their vow & the swearing of it is to declare their sincerity not only to do it but to to finish it. The keeping of any oath is the work of man's hands for why God will judge it.

But why do it?

People complain about self serving politicians and breaking their promises from their campaigns to get elected in the performance of the office they hold, so why do it?

Same with the military. People have been court-martialed and even dishonorably discharged so what power does the military oath has? It cannot make the vower keep the vow. All the law does is expose the sin by that vow and thus adding double penalty before God for when the vows are broken.

Looking for assurance by the deed of the law to make a person good and to do good is vain and an offense to God.

Look at the witness vow in the judicial court system where they are to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God. But His words says He cannot help you tell the truth; you either do it or you do not. Then the court will instruct the witness to answer the question put to them in an yes or no answer or else be fined contempt of court, but not every question can be answered in a yes or no by the witness. Can God help that witness there? No. All they really need to do is instruct the witness the penalty for lying on the witness stand because as it is, people have lied on the witness stand regardless of making the oath to tell the whole truth.

Adding extra wedding vows of love from each potential spouse to God's covenant of marriage may very well be why there are so many divorces because love is not boastful and for the Christian, they are supposed to be relying on Jesus Christ all the time by His words that He will supply all the love they need along with other fruits of the Spirit in blessing their marriage in bring fruitful.

This is Hollywood & and the world's programming into seeing what looks like that everybody is doing it and so it must be okay, but it is not..

Even Alcoholics Anonymous & Narcotic Anonymous all have each addict choose a higher power and make a commitment to stay sober; the reward is given to them keeping that commitment; not to the higher power helping them no matter if the addict think that higher power which can be a tree, Britney Spears, or Jesus Christ. So while addicts roll their eyes to each addict's higher power, the credit for their sobriety is given to each addict keeping that commitment. Why? They did it. Not their higher power. And the Bible agrees, even though God knows if they really kept it or not and will be judged by it.

Do you look to yourself to fulfill the duty of your office by keeping that oath and failing the letter of it? Do you believe you will be found justified by the keeping of that oath in Heaven to God having sworn it on the Bible? Then ask Jesus to forgive you, set you free from that oath, and trust Him to help you fulfill the duty of your office in doing good while being good by His grace & by His help.

As it is, my question to you is, can Christians drop Mason from that Lodge and just make it a Christian Lodge, having no oaths in it but keeping the faith in Jesus Christ that He is in us & with us always as we trust Him to help us be good & to do good by His grace & by His help?

Or is there an higher authority reigning over all lodges that no lodge cannot do that?

Umm, no, the Scripture actually does not say that. One quote, taken out of context, says that and a text, out of context, is a pretext for a proof text. I'll be happy to teach this Bible lesson again if you need it. Simple version, Matthew 5 refers to frivolous oaths AND can be a reference to the higher standard Christians should try to achieve in the world, similar to hatred being equal to murder and lust being equal to adultery. The biggest blow to this false "no oaths" teaching? Christ took an oath in Mark 14.

Which really blows your entire point away since virtually everybody takes some form of oath in both the ancient and modern world.

As for your example of military members failing to keep their oaths, that falls flat on its face because it is a double standard. Many who claim to be Christian are not, but by their actions and words is Christ condemned and His words made false? God forbid.

Oh, for your last bit: No, there is no central body in regular Freemasonry that controls "world wide masonry" or any other such claptrap. The core of any authority are the Grand Lodges, which derive their authority from the local lodges (sound familiar?). The Grand Lodges, in accord with each other establish rules and relations between themselves. Grand Lodges who act wildly and outside the standards of regular Freemasonry are not recognized.

 

[Hark]

Umm, no, the Scripture actually does not say that. One quote, taken out of context, says that and a text, out of context, is a pretext for a proof text. I'll be happy to teach this Bible lesson again if you need it. Simple version, Matthew 5 refers to frivolous oaths AND can be a reference to the higher standard Christians should try to achieve in the world, similar to hatred being equal to murder and lust being equal to adultery. The biggest blow to this false "no oaths" teaching? Christ took an oath in Mark 14.

Scripture cannot go against scripture. I have read Mark 14th chapter in the KJV and saw no oath that Jesus has made.. So you will have to show your corrupt version and the exact verse that you claim you read. Yes, there are corrupted versions as the CEV changes the message in Matthew 5:33-37 & Galatians 5:1-5.

The irony is that you taught no lesson. You did not prove anything.

Matthew 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

That is Jesus broaching the topic of oaths in how the Jews finished their oaths, but He goes on to say not to even swear at all either which is what the Jews did to show the sincerity of performing that oath.

34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Jesus said why.. because the oath maker has to do the oath; finish it as it is the work of his hands. For a believer to put himself under the law by an oath is leaving him wide open to be judged for not finishing that oath as the law says.

Numbers 30:2 If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.

Ecclesiastes 5:4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. 5 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? 7 For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

It should be no wonder why Jesus just told you to say yes yes or no no for whatever is more than that is of evil.

Which really blows your entire point away since virtually everybody takes some form of oath in both the ancient and modern world.

The world lives in sin. It is not a big surprise here.

As for your example of military members failing to keep their oaths, that falls flat on its face because it is a double standard. Many who claim to be Christian are not, but by their actions and words is Christ condemned and His words made false? God forbid.

It is one thing to agree to do good but it is another to vow to to good. When you do not do that good, you have sinned twice by breaking the vow to do that good.

Oh, for your last bit: No, there is no central body in regular Freemasonry that controls "world wide masonry" or any other such claptrap. The core of any authority are the Grand Lodges, which derive their authority from the local lodges (sound familiar?). The Grand Lodges, in accord with each other establish rules and relations between themselves. Grand Lodges who act wildly and outside the standards of regular Freemasonry are not recognized.

So if your lodge dropped all the oaths, to live by faith in Jesus Christ to help you do good and be good, then Masons will not recognize your lodge. So in that sense, that is an authority in agreement that all Masons will do even though they did not swear an oath to it.

 

[squirrelyguy]

First off I don't believe it too be a sin to swear an oath.
I've held public office for years and swear an oath after each election. How is that different?

Some religious traditions call for the substitution of "I Affirm" in place of "I Swear." To affirm that you will tell the truth (or to faithfully perform the responsibilities of your elected office) is one thing. The concept of swearing an oath is more than just an affirmation; it's seen as a way of inviting curses on yourself for failing to tell the truth or follow through on what you say. The way an oath binds someone with curses depends on who or what they swear by. If you swear by God, then God is the one you are inviting to bring curses upon you. If you swear by Caesar, then Caesar is the one you are inviting curses from.

Jesus explains the difference in Matthew 5:33-37, although some of what He says on this is still unclear to me. But His conclusion seems plain enough: "But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one."

 

[kamaeq]

Scripture cannot go against scripture. I have read Mark 14th chapter in the KJV and saw no oath that Jesus has made.. So you will have to show your corrupt version and the exact verse that you claim you read. Yes, there are corrupted versions as the CEV changes the message in Matthew 5:33-37 & Galatians 5:1-5.

The irony is that you taught no lesson. You did not prove anything.

Matthew 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

That is Jesus broaching the topic of oaths in how the Jews finished their oaths, but He goes on to say not to even swear at all either which is what the Jews did to show the sincerity of performing that oath.

34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: 35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. 36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Jesus said why.. because the oath maker has to do the oath; finish it as it is the work of his hands. For a believer to put himself under the law by an oath is leaving him wide open to be judged for not finishing that oath as the law says.

Numbers 30:2 If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.

Ecclesiastes 5:4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. 5 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? 7 For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

It should be no wonder why Jesus just told you to say yes yes or no no for whatever is more than that is of evil.

Oh, I didn't give a Bible lesson, but it seems you need one. You are correct, Scripture does not contradict Scripture, but a text out of context is a pretext for a proof text. You say you found nothing in Mark 14? Let me help you and then cross reference it a bit.

But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(Mar 14:61-62)

And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.
(Luk 22:66-71)

But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(Mat 26:63-64)

Adjuration
A solemn appeal whereby one person imposes on another the obligation of speaking or acting as if under an oath (1Sa_14:24; Jos_6:26; 1Ki_22:16).
We have in the New Testament a striking example of this (Mat_26:63; Mar_5:7), where the high priest calls upon Christ to avow his true character. It would seem that in such a case the person so adjured could not refuse to give an answer.
The word “adjure”, i.e., cause to swear is used with reference to the casting out of demons (Act_19:13).
(From Easton's Bible Dictionary and several others)

As you can see, you are incorrect in your claim. Jesus did, in fact, swear an oath before the high priest and council that He was the Christ.

For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. (Heb 6:13-20)

So, it appears that by these few examples listed that God does indeed swear oaths.
Your quotes of Numbers and Ecclesiastes are relevant to the swearing of oaths, for the obvious reasons given in those verses.

Paul swore oaths a number of times in his letters that make up a great part of the New Testament.

The lesson you are missing in Matthew 5 is against frivolous oaths and as a lesson to Christians to not have two standards of speech, but consider all of their words to be as if under an oath before God for truthfulness.

This common error becomes obvious when using Matthew 5 as the core "proof text" for this error. Matthew 5 is the Sermon on the Mount (also often misinterpreted) and around the "oath" portion are passages on anger, lust, divorce and vengeance. In all cases followers of Christ are exhorted to hold themselves to a higher standard than that listed under the Law, just as the section on "oaths" you cite does.

This can be expanded upon.

The world lives in sin. It is not a big surprise here.

Unfortunately for you, this is not the sin you claim it is.

It is one thing to agree to do good but it is another to vow to to good. When you do not do that good, you have sinned twice by breaking the vow to do that good.

Correct, if you take an oath then by not fulfilling it you become guilty of breaking that vow. Of course, for fun, the local former Masons have claimed to use an Old Testament temple ritual (without a temple and without being Jewish) to "cleanse" themselves from the oath they took before God. Which makes it extremely amusing that antimasons who claim to be Christian fawn over these oathbreakers even when they have been proven to be bearers of false witness and teachers of false doctrines from a Biblical Christian perspective.

So if your lodge dropped all the oaths, to live by faith in Jesus Christ to help you do good and be good, then Masons will not recognize your lodge. So in that sense, that is an authority in agreement that all Masons will do even though they did not swear an oath to it.

Heh, it also wouldn't be a Masonic lodge. It might be some other kind of fraternal group, but that is another discussion. However, it is possible for a group of lodges to change their standards as has happened in the past. They are not regular Freemasonry and membership in such groups will lose a Mason his standing as such. You can call it an "authority", but it is by agreement among many to keep to certain standards.
These standards are not incompatible with Christianity.
FYI, irregular Freemasonry (groups not recognized by the Masons you are libeling) remains the second most used source (after outright forgeries and fakes) by antimasons who claim to be Christian.

I also noticed that you missed the point of the organization of Grand Lodges from individual lodges.

 

[Hark]

Oh, I didn't give a Bible lesson, but it seems you need one. You are correct, Scripture does not contradict Scripture, but a text out of context is a pretext for a proof text. You say you found nothing in Mark 14? Let me help you and then cross reference it a bit.

But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(Mar 14:61-62)

And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. And they said, What need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth.
(Luk 22:66-71)

But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.
(Mat 26:63-64)

None of the scripture made Jesus swear, let alone make an oath first before answering.

Adjuration
A solemn appeal whereby one person imposes on another the obligation of speaking or acting as if under an oath (1Sa_14:24; Jos_6:26; 1Ki_22:16).

Do apply the words "as if " under oath but yet not really under oath.

We have in the New Testament a striking example of this (Mat_26:63; Mar_5:7), where the high priest calls upon Christ to avow his true character.

That would mean He had to make an oath and swear to that oath before answering. He did not. He simply answered.

It would seem that in such a case the person so adjured could not refuse to give an answer.

God can refuse. Jesus chose to answer.

The word “adjure”, i.e., cause to swear is used with reference to the casting out of demons (Act_19:13).
(From Easton's Bible Dictionary and several others)

Acts 19:13 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. 14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? 16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.

See how the demons answered too? They did not make an oath nor swear by that oath before answering.

Adjure can only be applied as "command" in this example which shows those who said such a thing, had no power over those demons. Neither did they who commanded Christ to answer, had power over Him to answer, but He did anyway.

As you can see, you are incorrect in your claim. Jesus did, in fact, swear an oath before the high priest and council that He was the Christ.

No. That would be like forcing an oath on others without them ever saying an oath. No one has that power to do that to any one. Even in our court of law, the witness has to swear to tell the truth first before answering questions in truth and yet perjury still happens.

You are kind of straining at the gnat here because then no one would have to make an oath if people can put an oath on others. They have to agree to the oath for them to be under oath before answering under oath.

So the "as if under oath" by your definition means they are not really under oath.

 

[Hark]

For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself, Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath: That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. (Heb 6:13-20)

God would have to say "I swear by Me, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee." but that is not what He'd said.

When God speaks, it is the truth; His word will not return void. No swearing nor oath required.

Isaiah 55: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

The only reason men do it is because they are sinners and an oath and swearing by that oath is to show the sincerity of the man finishing that oath. God has no reason to do that when all He needs to do is speak and it is done. Same thing with a marriage covenant; as an agreement without adding "I swear" by either party which today's marriage, they sin against God by adding vows of love to that marriage covenant rather than just saying yes to taking each other as their spouse.

Galatians 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

So it is disturbing how in the face of scripture, nobody sees the offense towards God's Covenant of Marriage, let alone the New Covenant by adding extra vows, promises, or commitments.

Even more so, when swearing an oath on a Bible in Freemasonry that Masons says they will not hold the swearer to it, that the oath does not mean anything, even though it is being sworn on the Bible which condemns false swearers.

So, it appears that by these few examples listed that God does indeed swear oaths.
Your quotes of Numbers and Ecclesiastes are relevant to the swearing of oaths, for the obvious reasons given in those verses.

Paul swore oaths a number of times in his letters that make up a great part of the New Testament.

The lesson you are missing in Matthew 5 is against frivolous oaths and as a lesson to Christians to not have two standards of speech, but consider all of their words to be as if under an oath before God for truthfulness.

This common error becomes obvious when using Matthew 5 as the core "proof text" for this error. Matthew 5 is the Sermon on the Mount (also often misinterpreted) and around the "oath" portion are passages on anger, lust, divorce and vengeance. In all cases followers of Christ are exhorted to hold themselves to a higher standard than that listed under the Law, just as the section on "oaths" you cite does.

This can be expanded upon.

Unfortunately for you, this is not the sin you claim it is.

Correct, if you take an oath then by not fulfilling it you become guilty of breaking that vow. Of course, for fun, the local former Masons have claimed to use an Old Testament temple ritual (without a temple and without being Jewish) to "cleanse" themselves from the oath they took before God. Which makes it extremely amusing that antimasons who claim to be Christian fawn over these oathbreakers even when they have been proven to be bearers of false witness and teachers of false doctrines from a Biblical Christian perspective.

Heh, it also wouldn't be a Masonic lodge. It might be some other kind of fraternal group, but that is another discussion. However, it is possible for a group of lodges to change their standards as has happened in the past. They are not regular Freemasonry and membership in such groups will lose a Mason his standing as such. You can call it an "authority", but it is by agreement among many to keep to certain standards.
These standards are not incompatible with Christianity.
FYI, irregular Freemasonry (groups not recognized by the Masons you are libeling) remains the second most used source (after outright forgeries and fakes) by antimasons who claim to be Christian.

I also noticed that you missed the point of the organization of Grand Lodges from individual lodges.

I believe the devil's purpose of the Lodge is to cause men to sin in their flesh by swearing falsely.

Malachi 3:5And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of hosts.

Ecclesiastes 5:1Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil. 2 Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. 3 For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool's voice is known by multitude of words. 4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. 5 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? 7 For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

So your case is not really supported by scripture, especially when considering all that false swearing being done in Mason and on the Bible too.

 

[kamaeq]

None of the scripture made Jesus swear, let alone make an oath first before answering.

Do apply the words "as if " under oath but yet not really under oath.

That would mean He had to make an oath and swear to that oath before answering. He did not. He simply answered.

God can refuse. Jesus chose to answer.

Acts 19:13 Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. 14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? 16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.

See how the demons answered too? They did not make an oath nor swear by that oath before answering.

Adjure can only be applied as "command" in this example which shows those who said such a thing, had no power over those demons. Neither did they who commanded Christ to answer, had power over Him to answer, but He did anyway.

No. That would be like forcing an oath on others without them ever saying an oath. No one has that power to do that to any one. Even in our court of law, the witness has to swear to tell the truth first before answering questions in truth and yet perjury still happens.

You are kind of straining at the gnat here because then no one would have to make an oath if people can put an oath on others. They have to agree to the oath for them to be under oath before answering under oath.

So the "as if under oath" by your definition means they are not really under oath.

Nice quibbling, ducking and dodging. When the high priest adjured someone, they were under oath and required to answer as his authority required them to. Note in your demon example, those without authority attempted the same thing and the answer they got was to be attacked.
Now, the only way you get out of this one is to claim the heretical teaching that Jesus was not a Jew under the Law at that time.

'If anyone sins after he hears a public adjuration (solemn command to testify) when he is a witness, whether he has seen or [otherwise] known [something]--if he fails to report it, then he will bear his guilt and be held responsible.
(Lev 5:1)
Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, 'If no man has lain with you, and if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while you were under your husband's authority, be free from this water of bitterness that brings the curse.
(Num 5:19)
And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies. So none of the people tasted any food.
(1Sa 14:24)

What now, are you going to claim that Jesus' response of "Thou hast said..." doesn't count as an affirmation of what the high priest adjured Him to state clearly by the living God?

Laughable that you try to claim the US Courts are equal to the words of the Bible when claiming that nobody can be put under oath without their consent.

What you are teaching about Christians 100% not giving oaths represents a false doctrine, since God Himself has given affirmations under oaths in His name as I've shown from Scripture. To continue to claim otherwise means you are teaching contradictory to Scripture. Are you in error or are you being malicious in this?

 

[Hark]

Nice quibbling, ducking and dodging. When the high priest adjured someone, they were under oath and required to answer as his authority required them to. Note in your demon example, those without authority attempted the same thing and the answer they got was to be attacked.
Now, the only way you get out of this one is to claim the heretical teaching that Jesus was not a Jew under the Law at that time.

'If anyone sins after he hears a public adjuration (solemn command to testify) when he is a witness, whether he has seen or [otherwise] known [something]--if he fails to report it, then he will bear his guilt and be held responsible.
(Lev 5:1)
Then the priest shall make her take an oath, saying, 'If no man has lain with you, and if you have not turned aside to uncleanness while you were under your husband's authority, be free from this water of bitterness that brings the curse.
(Num 5:19)
And the men of Israel were distressed that day: for Saul had adjured the people, saying, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies. So none of the people tasted any food.
(1Sa 14:24)

What now, are you going to claim that Jesus' response of "Thou hast said..." doesn't count as an affirmation of what the high priest adjured Him to state clearly by the living God?

Laughable that you try to claim the US Courts are equal to the words of the Bible when claiming that nobody can be put under oath without their consent.

What you are teaching about Christians 100% not giving oaths represents a false doctrine, since God Himself has given affirmations under oaths in His name as I've shown from Scripture. To continue to claim otherwise means you are teaching contradictory to Scripture. Are you in error or are you being malicious in this?

I still see you are deflecting from the issue at hand while ignoring other scriptures that plainly reproves otherwise. Proof?

None of what you had shared matters when God hates false swearers. You still have not justified how the Masons do their initiation oath and all the other following oaths for each advancing degree.

So who are you going to listen to? Masons that says the oaths does not really matter and they will not hold you to it, but you are swearing it on the Bible thus making you a false swearer by His words that you had sworn on? See the offense towards God now?

I do thank you for replying and sharing your views on the matter, but really, there is no talking around that, although I am sure you have heard that from others.

The only way to stop swearing falsely by the Masons' oaths is to stop with the those Mason oaths altogether.

 

[kamaeq]

God would have to say "I swear by Me, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee." but that is not what He'd said.

When God speaks, it is the truth; His word will not return void. No swearing nor oath required.

Isaiah 55: 11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
(Gen 22:15-18)

You really should have read the entire passage, because it does refute your claims afterwards.

Although given your response, it does appear that the first thing you should do is study the Bible, because you scored on yourself right there in your ignorance since the Bible records that God said what you claim He should have said to get past your quibbling.

The only reason men do it is because they are sinners and an oath and swearing by that oath is to show the sincerity of the man finishing that oath. God has no reason to do that when all He needs to do is speak and it is done. Same thing with a marriage covenant; as an agreement without adding "I swear" by either party which today's marriage, they sin against God by adding vows of love to that marriage covenant rather than just saying yes to taking each other as their spouse.

Galatians 3:15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

So it is disturbing how in the face of scripture, nobody sees the offense towards God's Covenant of Marriage, let alone the New Covenant by adding extra vows, promises, or commitments.

Even more so, when swearing an oath on a Bible in Freemasonry that Masons says they will not hold the swearer to it, that the oath does not mean anything, even though it is being sworn on the Bible which condemns false swearers.

Ummm, no, Freemasonry does not say that the obligation before God has no meaning. There are penalties in Masonry for violating that obligation taken before God. If there are other penalties beyond those, that is between their Deity and themselves.

I believe the devil's purpose of the Lodge is to cause men to sin in their flesh by swearing falsely.

Malachi 3:5And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the Lord of hosts.

Ecclesiastes 5:1Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil. 2 Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. 3 For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool's voice is known by multitude of words. 4 When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. 5 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6 Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? 7 For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

Heh, you do realize that to be a "false swearer" you have to violate what you have sworn, correct? You know, like those former Masons who are now antimasons claiming to be Christian and "spilling" all the "secrets of Freemasonry" when they are actually bearing falsehoods on top of violating their obligation taken before God and in His name. Real trustworthy types, right?

So your case is not really supported by scripture, especially when considering all that false swearing being done in Mason and on the Bible too.

Actually, my case is well supported by Scripture on oaths. It appears you are trying to defend your singular position based on one verse taken out of context. Answer Scripture with Scripture, not with appeals to the US Court system, especially with all the evidence of how corrupt (with a few outstanding exceptions) the federal legal system appears to be in the last several years.
What is not supported is your claim of "false swearing" in Masonry, although it appears you don't know what you are talking about when you claim "false swearing". Oh, BTW, it is totally irrelevant to a Christian whether it happens on the Bible or not.

 

[kamaeq]

I still see you are deflecting from the issue at hand while ignoring other scriptures that plainly reproves otherwise. Proof?

None of what you had shared matters when God hates false swearers. You still have not justified how the Masons do their initiation oath and all the other following oaths for each advancing degree.

So who are you going to listen to? Masons that says the oaths does not really matter and they will not hold you to it, but you are swearing it on the Bible thus making you a false swearer by His words that you had sworn on? See the offense towards God now?

I do thank you for replying and sharing your views on the matter, but really, there is no talking around that, although I am sure you have heard that from others.

The only way to stop swearing falsely by the Masons' oaths is to stop with the those Mason oaths altogether.

There is no deflection since I'm simply expanding on the Scriptures I'm using as proofs while disproving yours with Scripture or showing why there is no contradiction, which there would be following your interpretation.

You really need to define what you mean by "false swearers", because what you appear to be claiming doesn't appear to match the meaning in the Bible. While I agree that God hates those who swear falsely, you appear to means something other than those who break their oaths.
There is no problem with the Masonic obligations from a Biblical or Christian point of view, so why do I have to justify them?

I listen to God and read the Scriptures to learn what He wants us to know.
You speak falsely when you claim that Masons say the oaths don't really matter, there are penalties in Freemasonry for Masons who violate their obligations. Even if there were none, it does not make one a "false swearer" before God. That happens when one says they will do (or not do) something and they fail to do (or not do) that something. Example: If you promise to forsake all others (sexually) and keep yourself only for your spouse, but then seek another, you have sworn falsely.

No, there really isn't, either one accepts what the Bible teaches or one adds onto the teachings of the Bible contrary to what the Bible teaches. I have chosen to accept what the Bible teaches.

Sure thing, but I think I'll leave the false swearing with Masonic oaths thing to the former Masons who break that oath by talking about things they swore before God to keep secret, thereby becoming real false swearers before God.

 

[Hark]

And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.
(Gen 22:15-18)

You really should have read the entire passage, because it does refute your claims afterwards.

Well, I am open to correction, but are you? Mark 14th reference and all other N.T. references did not meet your claim that Jesus had sworn.

It is probable that because of this test of Abraham's faith, God obligates to offer assurances with what He was about to say to Abraham.

Have any other verses of God swearing to Himself?

That still does not negate what God expects on man to do that places themselves under the oath and even swearing by it; nor does it validate swearing falsely.

But I thank you for correcting me that God has sworn to Himself, albeit you finally cited that reference and posted the actual scripture too for me to read, but that does not make your case that it is oaky to swear falsely as Masons do.

Although given your response, it does appear that the first thing you should do is study the Bible, because you scored on yourself right there in your ignorance since the Bible records that God said what you claim He should have said to get past your quibbling.

No, it does not. You cannot recall every trivia of information from the Bible and you certainly are not listening to His words about swearing falsely either. You do not get to avert correction by scripture on that point, brother. You cannot.

Ummm, no, Freemasonry does not say that the obligation before God has no meaning. There are penalties in Masonry for violating that obligation taken before God. If there are other penalties beyond those, that is between their Deity and themselves.

Show the initiation oath for a new Mason.

Now show the oath for each advancing degree.

It is the penalties of being buried alive up to your head and having your head exposed to the advancing tide on the beach is the one where they say... they will not hold you to that penalty but it is in the oath.

Heh, you do realize that to be a "false swearer" you have to violate what you have sworn, correct? You know, like those former Masons who are now antimasons claiming to be Christian and "spilling" all the "secrets of Freemasonry" when they are actually bearing falsehoods on top of violating their obligation taken before God and in His name. Real trustworthy types, right?

Swearing to a penalty in that oath as cited that Masons are saying they will not do that.. is falsely swearing.

Actually, my case is well supported by Scripture on oaths. It appears you are trying to defend your singular position based on one verse taken out of context.

Like I said, I can be corrected by scripture showing that God has sworn by Himself. That does not prove your case at all STILL.

What God can do from what man cannot do is why Jesus warned believers not to make oaths that are His to keep per the New Covenant.

Answer Scripture with Scripture, not with appeals to the US Court system, especially with all the evidence of how corrupt (with a few outstanding exceptions) the federal legal system appears to be in the last several years.

Until you show how your oaths are different regarding the penalties within that oath, from what I recollected, that is still swearing falsely.

What is not supported is your claim of "false swearing" in Masonry, although it appears you don't know what you are talking about when you claim "false swearing". Oh, BTW, it is totally irrelevant to a Christian whether it happens on the Bible or not.

How you applied scripture is like saying God says thou shalt not kill without acknowledging that Jews are to stone Jews that break the sabbath.

Just because God has sworn by Himself, does not mean you can ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.

 

[Hark]

There is no deflection since I'm simply expanding on the Scriptures I'm using as proofs while disproving yours with Scripture or showing why there is no contradiction, which there would be following your interpretation.

You really need to define what you mean by "false swearers", because what you appear to be claiming doesn't appear to match the meaning in the Bible. While I agree that God hates those who swear falsely, you appear to means something other than those who break their oaths.
There is no problem with the Masonic obligations from a Biblical or Christian point of view, so why do I have to justify them?

I listen to God and read the Scriptures to learn what He wants us to know.
You speak falsely when you claim that Masons say the oaths don't really matter, there are penalties in Freemasonry for Masons who violate their obligations. Even if there were none, it does not make one a "false swearer" before God. That happens when one says they will do (or not do) something and they fail to do (or not do) that something. Example: If you promise to forsake all others (sexually) and keep yourself only for your spouse, but then seek another, you have sworn falsely.

No, there really isn't, either one accepts what the Bible teaches or one adds onto the teachings of the Bible contrary to what the Bible teaches. I have chosen to accept what the Bible teaches.

Sure thing, but I think I'll leave the false swearing with Masonic oaths thing to the former Masons who break that oath by talking about things they swore before God to keep secret, thereby becoming real false swearers before God.

Just because God has sworn by Himself, does not mean you can ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.

 

[cjab]

Straight questions with straight answers.

How does Enoch figure in your tradition? What is his role and what is his wisdom?

 

[kamaeq]

Well, I am open to correction, but are you? Mark 14th reference and all other N.T. references did not meet your claim that Jesus had sworn.

It is probable that because of this test of Abraham's faith, God obligates to offer assurances with what He was about to say to Abraham.

Have any other verses of God swearing to Himself?

That still does not negate what God expects on man to do that places themselves under the oath and even swearing by it; nor does it validate swearing falsely.

But I thank you for correcting me that God has sworn to Himself, albeit you finally cited that reference and posted the actual scripture too for me to read, but that does not make your case that it is oaky to swear falsely as Masons do.

No, it does not. You cannot recall every trivia of information from the Bible and you certainly are not listening to His words about swearing falsely either. You do not get to avert correction by scripture on that point, brother. You cannot.

Show the initiation oath for a new Mason.

Now show the oath for each advancing degree.

It is the penalties of being buried alive up to your head and having your head exposed to the advancing tide on the beach is the one where they say... they will not hold you to that penalty but it is in the oath.

Swearing to a penalty in that oath as cited that Masons are saying they will not do that.. is falsely swearing.

Like I said, I can be corrected by scripture showing that God has sworn by Himself. That does not prove your case at all STILL.

What God can do from what man cannot do is why Jesus warned believers not to make oaths that are His to keep per the New Covenant.

Until you show how your oaths are different regarding the penalties within that oath, from what I recollected, that is still swearing falsely.

How you applied scripture is like saying God says thou shalt not kill without acknowledging that Jews are to stone Jews that break the sabbath.

Just because God has sworn by Himself, does not mean you can ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.

In the OT, the high priest or, in some cases, a priest could adjure someone (which is putting them under an oath before God) to force them to respond. The high priest did this to Jesus and Jesus responded, therefore His statements were made as an oath before God.

Correct, but there are other oaths, such as to never end the world by water again, etc. Look them up, if you are trying to follow the path of Christ, then familiarity with the Scriptures should be something you seek... and it is so trivial with the Internet.

Correct, if you take an oath, God expects you to fulfill it. That has not changed. When you take an oath and then violate it, then you are swearing falsely.

BTW, unless you are preaching a polytheistic Christianity, if God swears, that means the entire Trinity swore. God is One, not three.

The only way a Mason could swear falsely (or a politician, witness in court, military member, police officer, etc., etc., etc.) would be to violate that obligation, be it by word or action. For example, a politician who betrays his country would be one who swore falsely, as would be a "tell all" Mason who reveals what he has sworn before God not to reveal. Another way to say "swear falsely" is to take the name of the Lord in vain.

I know quite a bit and can read and find out. What I don't have to do, given the clear teaching of the Scriptures, is to submit to any kind of Judaizing Pharisees trying to add to the Word to satisfy their self righteousness. Especially when they don't even bother to run an Internet search to look for things. There are several decent websites one can research the Bible directly on.

Violation of my obligation that I took before God. Are you attempting to make me swear falsely?

Violation of my obligation that I took before God. Are you attempting to make me swear falsely?

The "bloody oath" claim fails to note that these were potential JUDICIAL punishments from the time of the formation of Freemasonry, which was a time when groups of Christians killed each other over trivia. For the purposes of this conversation, not going to get into whether or not any particular group from those centuries were Christian or not. Some where, some where not and some were a bit confused and did what their religious leader told them to do. The only penalties in Freemasonry for a Mason violating his obligation are reprimand, suspension and expulsion. I just happened to get my degrees from a Grand Jurisdiction that didn't include the traditional penalties in the obligations.
Guess what? They get no credit for giving in to one of the demands of antimasonry and antimasons continue to claim all Masons are under "bloody oaths".

It is clearly laid out that the penalties are reprimand, suspension and expulsion and the language isn't that of what Masons will do to an oathbreaker, but the curse the one making the obligation is calling down on himself. Similar to: "...may God strike me dead if I'm lying!" The claim that Masons will kill Masons who break their obligations mostly comes from antimasons trying to peddle their wares or puff up their personal egos.

Then why did Paul take oaths in the letters he wrote that make up the bulk of the New Testament? Why did Jesus claim that he wasn't there to overthrow the Law but to fulfill it? Why are Christians supposed to still use the Old Testament if the New Testament renders it "useless in places"? Why does Hebrews 6:16 say: For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Yes, my position is well supported by the Bible in both the Old and New Testaments, whereas the concept that Christians should never swear is one that is based on a quote taken out of context as I showed in previous posts.

Nope, you really need to look this stuff up. Swearing falsely is breaking the oath that you made. Perjury is an example of swearing falsely. Treason is an example of swearing falsely. Embezzlement is often an example of swearing falsely. BTW, do you ever click to accept the Terms & Conditions for a piece of software? You have just entered a contract (an oath). Did you buy a house? Take out a loan? The list goes on and on. People do not realize how many obligations they put themselves under. Go back to Matthew 5, what is the standard for Christians under all of these promises they take?

Heh, actually you have that one backwards. "Thou shalt not kill" actually translates closer to "Thou shalt not murder". In other words, unlawful killing is prohibited. Killing in war, in self defense and by the lawful orders of the judicial system are not prohibited. In Matthew 5:22, part of the context of your "proof text" about taking oaths, Jesus points out that Christians are to be held to a higher and truer standard: Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. (Mat 5:21-22)
In other words, killing for revenge or in anger are unlawful.

I don't. I try my best to perform faithfully the obligations I have taken in His name. As long as I do so, I will not be one who swears falsely.

 

[kamaeq]

Just because God has sworn by Himself, does not mean you can ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.

Iron sharpens iron. If you want to actually do the Christian apologetics or discuss Christian theology, then you need to understand the basics and become a Berean and diligently search the Scriptures to see if a teaching is right or wrong. Then use Scripture to expound upon Scripture. Simply claiming that I "ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.", doesn't cut it for this kind of discussion. Most especially when you are openly and obviously failing to understand what swearing falsely is according to the Bible and even a modern dictionary.

It is a case of bearing false witness really.

 

[Hark]

In the OT, the high priest or, in some cases, a priest could adjure someone (which is putting them under an oath before God) to force them to respond. The high priest did this to Jesus and Jesus responded, therefore His statements were made as an oath before God.

Are there any scripture that testify that a person can force an oath on someone like that?

So I have to doubt the validity of how you are applying adjuring someone to mean. It can just be seen as commanding them to answer.

Correct, but there are other oaths, such as to never end the world by water again, etc. Look them up, if you are trying to follow the path of Christ, then familiarity with the Scriptures should be something you seek... and it is so trivial with the Internet.

Correct, if you take an oath, God expects you to fulfill it. That has not changed. When you take an oath and then violate it, then you are swearing falsely.

BTW, unless you are preaching a polytheistic Christianity, if God swears, that means the entire Trinity swore. God is One, not three.

There ae 3 Witnesses within the Godhead for why by His commandments to men in how to establish a testimony and or to judge any one, it cannot be done by one person but by 2 or 3 witnesses; Deuteronomy 17:6; & 19:15 . As God commands, so does He do as the 3 Witnesses within the One God. That is why God adhered to John 8:17 for the father's witness from heaven to be true, the Holy Spirit had to add His witness to the father's regarding His Son at His water baptism in Matthew 3:15-17 which was in fulfillment of the prophesy in Isaiah 48:16-17.

The only way a Mason could swear falsely (or a politician, witness in court, military member, police officer, etc., etc., etc.) would be to violate that obligation, be it by word or action. For example, a politician who betrays his country would be one who swore falsely, as would be a "tell all" Mason who reveals what he has sworn before God not to reveal.

What are you doing but attempting to reveal about Freemasonry what you sworn not to tell?

Another way to say "swear falsely" is to take the name of the Lord in vain.

It is a sin even though it is not attached to an oath. Not the same thing, but it is a sin.

I know quite a bit and can read and find out. What I don't have to do, given the clear teaching of the Scriptures, is to submit to any kind of Judaizing Pharisees trying to add to the Word to satisfy their self righteousness. Especially when they don't even bother to run an Internet search to look for things. There are several decent websites one can research the Bible directly on.

Violation of my obligation that I took before God. Are you attempting to make me swear falsely?

Violation of my obligation that I took before God. Are you attempting to make me swear falsely?

Matthew 5:33-37 is about how we are not to be under the law when abiding in Him in wishing to follow Him by faith in being good and doing good. We either follow Him by faith for that or we are resorting to the deeds of the law to do good and be good & such shall be judged by the law. When you realize that He wants us to rely on Him to help us be good & to do good, then He will set you free from your yokes of bondages to follow Him by trusting Him as your Good Shepherd & friend to help you to follow Him apart from the law & those bondages by the law..

The "bloody oath" claim fails to note that these were potential JUDICIAL punishments from the time of the formation of Freemasonry, which was a time when groups of Christians killed each other over trivia. For the purposes of this conversation, not going to get into whether or not any particular group from those centuries were Christian or not.

We are not to judge any one as not a Christian, since obviously, many can go astray from the Lord & yet still be saved. That is why we are called to correct them and not condemn them. If they do not listen, they are to be excommunicated, or withdraw from fellowship until they do repent.

Those whom have killed in His name. will answer for it. Whether or not they had repented of it before their deathbed, God knows, but the unrepented are still saved but at risk in missing out on the firstfruits of the resurrection at the rapture event when He comes as the Bridegroom. Those unrepentant saints left behind are still saved, but shall die a physical death, whose spirits will be with the Lord in Heaven, awaiting their resurrection after the great tribulation. Make no mistake, God will judge His House first & keep the souls of His saints left behind

1 Peter 4:17 For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? 18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? 19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

So there is a race to be run but by faith in Jesus Christ to help us lay aside every weight & sin or else, we risk being disqualified from the race.

Hebrews 12:1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, 2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

1 Corinthians 9:24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. 25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. 26 I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: 27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

Some where, some where not and some were a bit confused and did what their religious leader told them to do. The only penalties in Freemasonry for a Mason violating his obligation are reprimand, suspension and expulsion. I just happened to get my degrees from a Grand Jurisdiction that didn't include the traditional penalties in the obligations.

I am glad that you shared this because I was under the impression that all Masons were under the traditional penalties in the obligations.

However, how do you apply standing fast in the liberty in which Christ has set us free and be ye not entangle again in the yoke of bondage of Galatians 5:1?

How do you apply Galatians 5:5 in how we are to receive the goodness from the Lord for how we are god and to do good by Him rather than by keeping a promise which is by the deed of the law?

I don't. I try my best to perform faithfully the obligations I have taken in His name. As long as I do so, I will not be one who swears falsely.

Doing your best by keeping an oath or promise by the deeds of the law is not what we, as Christians, should be about nor representing in this world, but we are to decrease so that He may increase by declaring our faith in Jesus Christ & the New Covenant to us that we do not need to add to it with our filthy rags of righteousness of our deeds by the law. Only God can show this to you & convict you of your need to withdraw from Freemasonry. You cannot be a Mason when you know other Christians in Freemasonry are including the traditional penalties in the obligations.

We are to abstain from all appearances of evil; and each time you take that oath, are you not denying that you were in the light but now entering the light? Think about that contradiction and it is in each oath too. It can't be about Jesus being that light, so what is that light & do you really want to be identified with that light when you are to represent the light of Christ Who is in you & is with you always as our faith declares??

 

[Hark]

Iron sharpens iron. If you want to actually do the Christian apologetics or discuss Christian theology, then you need to understand the basics and become a Berean and diligently search the Scriptures to see if a teaching is right or wrong. Then use Scripture to expound upon Scripture. Simply claiming that I "ignore all His warnings for swearing falsely and on the Bible too.", doesn't cut it for this kind of discussion. Most especially when you are openly and obviously failing to understand what swearing falsely is according to the Bible and even a modern dictionary.

It is a case of bearing false witness really.

I do not believe you did that Berean thing with those Mason oaths.

And when Freemasonry cites that any lodge can switch out the Bible with anything else, to swear on it, should leave you to wonder.

Pike, a Freemason, testified as to who that light is when they swear to it; Lucifer, which is a Latin name for Venus from the Latin Vulgate; not for the meaning as a reference to Satan's original name as if it was Lucifer when it never was. Both Occultists & Christians have it wrong.

Lucifer is the god of Freemasonry

Albert Pike, 33-degree Freemason and author of Morals and Dogma​

"Lucifer, the Light-Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!iv"

"The devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry. For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythological and horned form of the God Pan; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.v"

"The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is Yahweh (GOD) reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but a negation of God...the Kabala imagined Him to be a "most occult light."vi"

"That which we must say to a crowd is—We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees—The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.vii " ~~~ end of quotes from link

There are other quotes from Occultist and author Manly Palmer Hall. Eliphas Levi, & Arthur Edward Waite, 33-degree Freemason at the link.

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. 34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

My concern for you, brother, is valid. You got no business with the Lord in being a part of that fellowship of men when it is not of the Lord at all.

 

[kamaeq]

I do not believe you did that Berean thing with those Mason oaths.

Then you would be incorrect in your belief.

And when Freemasonry cites that any lodge can switch out the Bible with anything else, to swear on it, should leave you to wonder.

Since Freemasonry is a secular fraternity, it allows each member to take their obligations on the volume they consider sacred. Here, you are trying to force Freemasonry to be a Christian fraternity, which it is not.

Pike, a Freemason, testified as to who that light is when they swear to it; Lucifer, which is a Latin name for Venus from the Latin Vulgate; not for the meaning as a reference to Satan's original name as if it was Lucifer when it never was. Both Occultists & Christians have it wrong.

Long proven forgery by Leo Taxil, done to scam the RCC and quite successfully as well. Particularly the most "damning" quote at the end.
Also if one is going to cite Morals and Dogma, then one needs to deal with Pike's Preface to the book, something antimasons who claim to be Christian have failed for over a decade here (might be getting close to two decades) and many more decades in general.

The teachings of these Readings are not sacramental, so far as they go beyond the realm of Morality into those of other domains of Thought and Truth. The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite uses the word "Dogma" in its true sense, of doctrine, or teaching; and is not dogmatic in the odious sense of that term. Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound. It is only required of him that he shall weigh what is taught, and give it fair hearing and unprejudiced judgment. Of course, the ancient theosophic and philosophic speculations are not embodied as part of the doctrines of the Rite;...

Bold emphasis added.

Lucifer is the god of Freemasonry

Albert Pike, 33-degree Freemason and author of Morals and Dogma​

"Lucifer, the Light-Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!iv"

"The devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry. For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythological and horned form of the God Pan; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.v"

"The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is Yahweh (GOD) reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but a negation of God...the Kabala imagined Him to be a "most occult light."vi"

"That which we must say to a crowd is—We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees—The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.vii " ~~~ end of quotes from link

There are other quotes from Occultist and author Manly Palmer Hall. Eliphas Levi, & Arthur Edward Waite, 33-degree Freemason at the link.

Manly Palmer Hall was not a Freemason when he wrote his oft quoted comments, not until many years later.
Eliphas Levi left Freemasonry because it did not fit in with his personal beliefs for various reasons, although his writings do make up a large part of what Pike used for Morals & Dogma, for whatever reasons. It wasn't until later that it was figured out that Mr. Levi was making crap up as he went along.
Seriously, I don't know of any Mason who knows of Arthur E Waite, except by the same method I do, which is finding in the writings of the followers of antimasonry.

1 Corinthians 15:33 Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. 34 Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

2 Corinthians 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. 18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

My concern for you, brother, is valid. You got no business with the Lord in being a part of that fellowship of men when it is not of the Lord at all.

No, it isn't. You are following the beliefs of a cult (at least according to the CARM cult list) that is most definitely not following the Bible. Well, they are not all cultists, many are grifters trying to profit off this scam.

 

[kamaeq]

Are there any scripture that testify that a person can force an oath on someone like that?

So I have to doubt the validity of how you are applying adjuring someone to mean. It can just be seen as commanding them to answer.

'If anyone sins after he hears a public adjuration (solemn command to testify) when he is a witness, whether he has seen or [otherwise] known [something]--if he fails to report it, then he will bear his guilt and be held responsible. (Lev 5:1)

I solemnly charge you [in the name of] the Lord to have this letter read before all the brethren. (1Th 5:27)

You "doubt", but you definitely are showing an inability to use the multiple available resources online for Bibles, Bible dictionaries and Bible commentaries. This is a trivial exercise to find and the verses from each Testament are only a sample that proves your "doubt" to be false.

There ae 3 Witnesses within the Godhead for why by His commandments to men in how to establish a testimony and or to judge any one, it cannot be done by one person but by 2 or 3 witnesses; Deuteronomy 17:6; & 19:15 . As God commands, so does He do as the 3 Witnesses within the One God. That is why God adhered to John 8:17 for the father's witness from heaven to be true, the Holy Spirit had to add His witness to the father's regarding His Son at His water baptism in Matthew 3:15-17 which was in fulfillment of the prophesy in Isaiah 48:16-17.

Okay, that is totally off topic. The discussion was about God swearing oaths, which I've shown He has done repeatedly.

What are you doing but attempting to reveal about Freemasonry what you sworn not to tell?

Heh, no. I'm not violating my obligation to point out as a Christian apologist the false teachings of the cult of antimasonry that claims to be Christian. Yes, it is a cult, in line with the CARM list of cult traits.

It is a sin even though it is not attached to an oath. Not the same thing, but it is a sin.

There is some overlap there, but yes, it is not necessary to take an oath... even though another way of speaking of profanity was to call it profane oaths.

Matthew 5:33-37 is about how we are not to be under the law when abiding in Him in wishing to follow Him by faith in being good and doing good. We either follow Him by faith for that or we are resorting to the deeds of the law to do good and be good & such shall be judged by the law. When you realize that He wants us to rely on Him to help us be good & to do good, then He will set you free from your yokes of bondages to follow Him by trusting Him as your Good Shepherd & friend to help you to follow Him apart from the law & those bondages by the law..

Matthew 5-7 is a complete sermon, it must be taken in context, not simply snipping out the bit one would like to become the Law of the New Testament, which is exactly what people do when they use it as a basis for claiming Christians cannot take oaths.

Actually, I'm not under any bondage related to Freemasonry. Those that try to use Matthew 5:33-37 are binding themselves under a Pharisaical Law of the New Testament not supported by Scripture as I have shown.

We are not to judge any one as not a Christian, since obviously, many can go astray from the Lord & yet still be saved. That is why we are called to correct them and not condemn them. If they do not listen, they are to be excommunicated, or withdraw from fellowship until they do repent.

Do they show bad fruit? If one does not judge them, how can one correct them? If one does not judge them, then how does one know to excommunicate them? The command about judgement simply teaches that you will be judged by the standard you use to judge.
I've long written and spoken to the teachers of falsehood known as antimasons who claim to be Christian.

Those whom have killed in His name. will answer for it. Whether or not they had repented of it before their deathbed, God knows, but the unrepented are still saved but at risk in missing out on the firstfruits of the resurrection at the rapture event when He comes as the Bridegroom. Those unrepentant saints left behind are still saved, but shall die a physical death, whose spirits will be with the Lord in Heaven, awaiting their resurrection after the great tribulation. Make no mistake, God will judge His House first & keep the souls of His saints left behind

1 Peter 4:17

So there is a race to be run but by faith in Jesus Christ to help us lay aside every weight & sin or else, we risk being disqualified from the race.

Hebrews 12:1

1 Corinthians 9:24

And? How is this relevant to being a member in Freemasonry?
Unless YOU have judged that Freemasonry is a "weight", an "error", a "mistake". I've already shown that your first shot misses its mark no matter how you keep trying to claim that no Christian can swear an oath, obligation, etc. based on an out of context quote from the Sermon on the Mount.
I'll let you know something where the Bible and Freemasonry are in 100% agreement, if a man finds that Freemasonry interferes with his walk with his God, then that man should not be a Freemason. Note that in my case, it would be if Freemasonry interferes with MY walk with God, not the opinions of various Pharisees who add weights and burdens in the name of antimasonry. Especially when those "weights" and "burdens" have always been proven to not have a basis in Scripture, but have the same validity as all the extra manmade regulations added.

I am glad that you shared this because I was under the impression that all Masons were under the traditional penalties in the obligations.

However, how do you apply standing fast in the liberty in which Christ has set us free and be ye not entangle again in the yoke of bondage of Galatians 5:1?

How do you apply Galatians 5:5 in how we are to receive the goodness from the Lord for how we are god and to do good by Him rather than by keeping a promise which is by the deed of the law?

There is no contradiction. My obligations to Freemasonry do not interfere with my various other obligations in life, the foremost being that to God.
As for keeping the deeds of the Law. We are to do as Christ did and walk as He walked. You do realize He was a Jew among Jews, the only Man who kept the Law in its entirety. The Law can give us guidance as appropriate.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (2Ti 3:16-17)

The word is "All scripture", not "Only the bit of scripture that supports my position".

Doing your best by keeping an oath or promise by the deeds of the law is not what we, as Christians, should be about nor representing in this world, but we are to decrease so that He may increase by declaring our faith in Jesus Christ & the New Covenant to us that we do not need to add to it with our filthy rags of righteousness of our deeds by the law. Only God can show this to you & convict you of your need to withdraw from Freemasonry. You cannot be a Mason when you know other Christians in Freemasonry are including the traditional penalties in the obligations.

Do you deny that God has said that we are to keep our promises?

This has nothing to do with "righteousness", but simple obedience.

Well, not only has He not convicted me (since those trying to "help" Him along keep violating His Word). Their failures through the centuries among theologians, ministers, preachers, teachers and many others who are far better qualified than scam artists and conspiracy theorists who misquote and misinterpret the Bible to support their antimasonic teachings.

Yes, I can. I don't have to fall into the trap of being "woke" (to use a term currently in vogue) about the "bloody oaths". Especially when I hear someone like you insisting that they are something that Masons must do to anyone who breaks his obligation, when they are in fact quite obviously more in line with "may God punish me in this manner if I fail".

We are to abstain from all appearances of evil; and each time you take that oath, are you not denying that you were in the light but now entering the light? Think about that contradiction and it is in each oath too. It can't be about Jesus being that light, so what is that light & do you really want to be identified with that light when you are to represent the light of Christ Who is in you & is with you always as our faith declares??

No, I am not denying that I was in the light as a Christian. This is a teaching of antimasonry based on misquoting sources in Freemasonry.
In the first case, which proves the falsehood of the antimasonic position you are claiming, all references to light in Freemasonry are references to intellectual and philosophical light, not religious light. This is appropriate for a secular fraternity.

 

[Hark]

Then you would be incorrect in your belief.

Since Freemasonry is a secular fraternity, it allows each member to take their obligations on the volume they consider sacred.

Hence another religion. One that has special rites at funerals too with "so mote it be".

Here, you are trying to force Freemasonry to be a Christian fraternity, which it is not.

For a Christian to join Freemasonry and swearing it on the Bible, is not a Christian abstaining from all appearances of evil.

Long proven forgery by Leo Taxil, done to scam the RCC and quite successfully as well. Particularly the most "damning" quote at the end.
Also if one is going to cite Morals and Dogma, then one needs to deal with Pike's Preface to the book, something antimasons who claim to be Christian have failed for over a decade here (might be getting close to two decades) and many more decades in general.

The teachings of these Readings are not sacramental, so far as they go beyond the realm of Morality into those of other domains of Thought and Truth. The Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite uses the word "Dogma" in its true sense, of doctrine, or teaching; and is not dogmatic in the odious sense of that term. Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound. It is only required of him that he shall weigh what is taught, and give it fair hearing and unprejudiced judgment. Of course, the ancient theosophic and philosophic speculations are not embodied as part of the doctrines of the Rite;...

Bold emphasis added.

The red in bold is to accept this other religion for what it is.

Manly Palmer Hall was not a Freemason when he wrote his oft quoted comments, not until many years later.
Eliphas Levi left Freemasonry because it did not fit in with his personal beliefs for various reasons, although his writings do make up a large part of what Pike used for Morals & Dogma, for whatever reasons. It wasn't until later that it was figured out that Mr. Levi was making crap up as he went along.
Seriously, I don't know of any Mason who knows of Arthur E Waite, except by the same method I do, which is finding in the writings of the followers of antimasonry.

I can give partiality to accusations that may be false, but the appearance of evil is plain enough. No one can see your Christian faith in Freemasonry. You either serve him to be a witness to ALL the world or you are denying Him in a lace where His light is not allowed to shine.

No, it isn't. You are following the beliefs of a cult (at least according to the CARM cult list) that is most definitely not following the Bible. Well, they are not all cultists, many are grifters trying to profit off this scam.

I am not a follower of CARM. Thanks to Jesus Christ as my Good Shepherd, He helps me to follow Him.

Do consider that you may have been scammed into leaving your faith in Jesus Christ at the door of your Mason Lodge and every time you make a Masonic oath as if you were not in the light, but now entering the light.

Only Jesus Christ will tell you whether not honoring Him in that Lodge is something He will judge you by.

John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: 23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Colossians 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. 23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it.

So ask Jesus Christ today to help you hear Him if you need to withdraw from Freemasonry so they can see your faith in Jesus Christ.