Freemasonry and False Christian Cults with Dr. Shawn Waugh

[kamaeq]

So, the former FMs who spoke on those shows were all liars ?

A quick skim found one that was easy to spot. The claim being that the Bible always refers to God by name (how JWish) and never by the generic term of "Deity", but then "God" is a generic term (the translation of the Arabic word "Allah" is "God") as are many others. The former Freemason, Jack Harris claims that the Bible doesn't speak of God in generic terms like "Deity", but:

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
(Act 17:22-31)

There is no "name of God" listed in one of the greatest sermons in the world, instead there are several titles of Deity and only one mention of Christ, but then Christ is God since Christians aren't polytheists.

Note that Freemasonry holds a philosophical position on religion, not a religious one. Philosophically, one can show that the creation declares the Creator (stated in both Old & New Testaments) without having to give a name to that Creator. Freemasonry, as an organization, does not "accept" any specific religious figure(s), it simply declines to decide. That is left up to the individual Mason to define for himself according to his own faith.

 

[John t]

Before anyone tries to imagine "any Bible believing church teaching stuff like this", perhaps you could provide us with the reason why you think any "Bible believing church" should "teach stuff like this".
Perhaps you think "Bible believing" churches are fraternities or sororities? It appears so from your comment.

Big Hint: They are NOT fraternal organizations. They are not Scouting. They are not sports fan clubs. They are not drinking clubs.

You assume much about my post, and ALL of it is wrong.

Try to read again what I wrote because it is consistent with my sig lines. If you do not understand it, ask me to clarify, K?

 

[kamaeq]

You assume much about my post, and ALL of it is wrong.

Try to read again what I wrote because it is consistent with my sig lines. If you do not understand it, ask me to clarify, K?

Well the only thing you posted for yourself was:

Can you find a Bible Believing church teaching stuff like this?

Then you linked to an Ephesians5-11 document (and I can post at least a half dozen documents where I show that E5-11 makes false statements and claims from a Christian perspective).
So, my previous reply was correct and I agree, your sig is absolutely correct in its statements, like your former four axioms of apologetics one. So, how about you explain how your one sentence fallacious statement implying that any "Bible Believing church" would teach something from Freemasonry.

I assume we are going to go back to the typical pattern of you never answering the clarifying questions asked of you, a.k.a. Never admitting a mistake. That would be a great place to start actually, why don't you explain why you think ANY Bible believing church would teach the cited Masonic ritual. That would be amusing.

Or, as I said, continue with zero response posts like the one I'm replying too that hint at your "special knowledge". I can still quote the CARM document on certain groups' traits at that kind of behavior.

(sigh), back to having to archive responses again for honesty's sake.

 

[John t]

Then you linked to an Ephesians5-11 document (and I can post at least a half dozen documents where I show that E5-11 makes false statements and claims from a Christian perspective

Y A W N

Nothing new. So you condemn all of Ephesians 5:11 group as being false teachers but you do not provide an example of ANYTHING that I posted in this post https://forums.carm.org/threads/fre...ian-cults-with-dr-shawn-waugh.376/#post-21015 as being inaccurate. That is using the logical error called "poisoning the well".

Because the god of this world (Satan) has blinded you to supernatural things, you have no idea of what the Bible teaches, and how to be saved from the second death, which is forever. As the rich man found out, hell is a very painful place to be.

2 Corinthians 4:​

3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing.​

4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.​

5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake.​

​

I present to you truth, and really, in one way, it does not matter if that Ephesians 5:11 group does makes an error. What REALLY DOES MATTER is your life after this life. It is not gained by reciting arcane rituals, knowing secret hand shakes or secret passwords. It is founded upon the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and the sufficiency of it to permit all who trustingly believe in it to live forever in heaven with Jesus. So far, I have seen no evidences of that in any of the posts we shared over the years. And on that basis, it is my opinion that you are not a born-again Christian.

THAT is what truly matters.

 

[kamaeq]

Y A W N

Nothing new. So you condemn all of Ephesians 5:11 group as being false teachers but you do not provide an example of ANYTHING that I posted in this post https://forums.carm.org/threads/fre...ian-cults-with-dr-shawn-waugh.376/#post-21015 as being inaccurate. That is using the logical error called "poisoning the well".

Because the god of this world (Satan) has blinded you to supernatural things, you have no idea of what the Bible teaches, and how to be saved from the second death, which is forever. As the rich man found out, hell is a very painful place to be.

2 Corinthians 4:​

3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing.​

4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.​

5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake.​

​

I present to you truth, and really, in one way, it does not matter if that Ephesians 5:11 group does makes an error. What REALLY DOES MATTER is your life after this life. It is not gained by reciting arcane rituals, knowing secret hand shakes or secret passwords. It is founded upon the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and the sufficiency of it to permit all who trustingly believe in it to live forever in heaven with Jesus. So far, I have seen no evidences of that in any of the posts we shared over the years. And on that basis, it is my opinion that you are not a born-again Christian.

THAT is what truly matters.

Of course there is nothing new, we are still stuck at you proving why a Christian church would teach something from a secular fraternity, to which you still haven't provided an answer...

Yep, we are back to a failure to answer the questions.

No, my original post totally pointed out the irrelevance of your reposted E5-11 document and single sentence comment.

You failed in this post to "If you do not understand it, ask me to clarify, K?". I did, you didn't. Instead you post a rant about E5-11 being right even if they are "wrong in a few details" and make a big deal about it being "poisoning the well".

Guess what, you 100%, totally, absolutely and completely missed the point (yet again) of my original reply to your one sentence comment ("Can you find a Bible Believing church teaching stuff like this?"). Right or wrong, the entire quote bit in your original post has no relevance to the teachings of Christianity. Your comment claims otherwise and I proved it wrong in my reply.

So, now we have, from you, a reply that falsely accuses me of "not understanding" without you providing any clarification of why a Christian church would teach ANY fraternal order's rituals. You also claim that you will clarify if asked why your claim about churches teaching stuff from a secular fraternity was relevant. In your next reply, quoted at the top, you failed to do so again.

You claim to know that the "god of this world" has blinded me and I don't know what the Bible teaches. Then go on a rant based on your unBiblical accusation. UnBiblical? Why, yes it is.
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings. (Jer 17:9-10)

Only God can know the heart of any man. Those men who claim otherwise, as you just did in your post, are claiming to have the power of God and therefore claiming to be equal to God. You, neighbor are not equal to God. Your words are not to be trusted over those of God:
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. For he shall be like the heath in the desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited. (Jer 17:5-6)

I present to you truth, and really, in one way, it does not matter if that Ephesians 5:11 group does makes an error. What REALLY DOES MATTER is your life after this life. It is not gained by reciting arcane rituals, knowing secret hand shakes or secret passwords. It is founded upon the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and the sufficiency of it to permit all who trustingly believe in it to live forever in heaven with Jesus. So far, I have seen no evidences of that in any of the posts we shared over the years. And on that basis, it is my opinion that you are not a born-again Christian.

No, you have repeatedly presented that which is not the truth (John 8:44). You have repeatedly claimed that I (and all other regular Masons) must perform the work of leaving Freemasonry to be "really saved" by your teaching (Romans 11:6, Ephesians 2:8-9). You have repeatedly rejected all evidence that Freemasonry does not teach any plan of salvation. You have repeatedly contradicted what Scripture teaches in repeating the doctrines of antimasonry that claims to be Christian. IIRC, I have a copy of the post a few versions of these forums back when you uses the "4 Axioms of Apologetics" as a sig, where I showed how you broke all four of them in your zeal for antimasonry. (Yes, I have copies of the posts, I have to maintain them for reasons that you, I and another know.)

Oh, and thank God your opinion AS A MAN has absolutely NOTHING to do with my salvation through and by Jesus Christ, my Lord and Savior.

There you go, I have provided you with Scripture to use as a starting point to refute a number of the points I just made. Let's see if you can actually do so as a Christian apologist and Bible scholar. Maybe you will be the first ever.

Or, you know, just to clear this up, you can finally actually explain why a "Bible believing church" would teach that stuff.

Oh wait... Don't tell me... You actually got confused (or were deliberately confusing) about the difference between a Christian church and a secular fraternity? Trying to make the claim that if a church doesn't teach it, it shouldn't be taught? edit

I'll avoid that conclusion on the grounds that it would actually be insulting, not the usual snowflake "he hurt my widdle feelings by proving me wrong" faux injury.

 

[Septextura]

The Roman Catholic Military origin of Freemasonry and Luciferian Doctrines in brief explained in this video.

 

[DeSanto]

Fritz Springmeier

 

[kamaeq]

The Roman Catholic Military origin of Freemasonry and Luciferian Doctrines in brief explained in this video.

Little mixed up in there. The guy appears to be supporting karma and reincarnation as the opposition to the "Luciferian Doctrine", while still making the common error that Scottish Rite degree numbers are relevant to the Grand Lodges. Realize that all of the side degrees in Freemasonry (Scottish Rite, York Rite, Eastern Star, Shriners being the best known) rely totally on the permission of the Grand Lodge (first three degrees, top level "Master Mason") to even exist in a Grand Lodge's geographical territory. Which is why in some areas these side bodies don't exist.

Add into this the entire "Lucifer" thing is a mixture of a common misinterpretation/mistranslation of a single Bible passage (Isaiah 14) where God's judgement on a Babylonian king became, under Catholic (and passed on to many Protestant groups) teachings, became a judgement on Satan. The problem with that is that the word Lucifer refers to the planet Venus or "the bright and morning star" or "light bringer", which are also used as titles for Jesus...

Strikes a serious truth in there that without the fear of God, then men start thinking to themselves that they are like unto God and start making their own idols to worship, but all that is addressed in the Bible.

I don't see this as a big thing on the crusading orders themselves except that they enabled a freer flow of trade and ideas from the area, including reintroduction of lost books from ancient authors that had been preserved by the Islamic world. This did lead to the beginnings of a scientific and philosophical resurgence, until it was nipped in the bud by the start of the Renaissance and it all had to be "rediscovered".

I'd class this as a "drive by", since the guy does not appear to be actually antimasonic, just putting the shot in to sell his particular theory and the truth is, pushing antimasonry for profit has been a grift for over a century, probably over two. Look at it this way, the guy incorrectly translates "New Secular Order" or "New Order of the Secular World" as "New World Order" as is commonly done.

 

[Hark]

Add into this the entire "Lucifer" thing is a mixture of a common misinterpretation/mistranslation of a single Bible passage (Isaiah 14) where God's judgement on a Babylonian king became, under Catholic (and passed on to many Protestant groups) teachings, became a judgement on Satan. The problem with that is that the word Lucifer refers to the planet Venus or "the bright and morning star" or "light bringer", which are also used as titles for Jesus...

That alone should derail Satanism and Freemasonry as false when Lucifer was never the original name for Satan at all

 

[Mik]

It amazing to read such a defense of freemasonry at the expense of brothers in Christ. Makes one wonder if freemasonry isn't an idol to some.

 

[John t]

I fiind it a laugh when posters rely on their false learning rather than to seek source documents that far exceed the shallowness of non-learning.

From the ISBE (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

1. Names of Satan:​

The most important of these are the Hebrew and Greek equivalents noticed above. These words are used in the general sense justified by their etymological significance. It is applied even to Yahweh Himself (Nu 22:22,32; compare 1Sa 29:4; 2Sa 19:22; Ps 109:6, etc.). The word "Satan" is used 24 times in the Old Testament. In Job (1:6 f) and Zec (3:1 f) it has the prefixed definite article. In all cases but one when the article is omitted it is used in a general sense. This one exception is 1Ch 21:1 (compare 2Sa 24:1), where the word is generally conceded to be used as a proper name. This meaning is fixed in New Testament times. We are thus enabled to note in the term "Satan" (and Devil) the growth of a word from a general term to an appellation and later to a proper name. All the other names of Satan save only these two are descriptive titles. In addition to these two principal names a number of others deserve specific enumeration. Tempter (Mt 4:5; 1Th 3:5); Beelzebub (Mt 12:24); Enemy (Mt 13:39); Evil One (Mt 13:19,38; 1Joh 2:13,14; 3:12, and particularly 1Joh 5:18); Belial (2Co 6:15); Adversary (antidikos), (1Pe 5:8); Deceiver (literally "the one who deceives") (Re 12:9); Dragon (Great) (Re 12:3); Father of Lies (Joh 8:44); Murderer (Joh 8:44); Sinner (1 Joh 3:8)--these are isolated references occurring from 1 to 3 times each. In the vast​

​

In Hebrew grammar, the usage of the attached definite article (the) is significant because it signifies "the one and only" and there is one time where the article is omitted. The article explains that. If one is unfamiliar with Hebrew, the only resource one can use is unverifiable by independent investigation

2. Character of Satan:​

Satan is consistently represented in the New Testament as the enemy both of God and man. The popular notion is that Satan is the enemy of man and active in misleading and cursing humanity because of his intense hatred and opposition to God. Mt 13:39 would seem to point in this direction, but if one were to venture an opinion in a region where there are not enough facts to warrant a conviction, it would be that the general tenor of Scripture indicates quite the contrary, namely, that Satan's jealousy and hatred of men has led him into antagonism to God and, consequently, to goodness. The fundamental moral description of Satan is given by our Lord when He describes Satan as the "evil one" (Mt 13:19,38; compare Isaiah's description of Yahweh as the "Holy One," Isa 1:4 and often); that is, the one whose nature and will are given to evil. Moral evil is his controlling attribute. It is evident that this description could not be applied to Satan as originally created. Ethical evil cannot be concreated. It is the creation of each free will for itself. We are not told in definite terms how Satan became the evil one, but certainly it could be by no other process than a fall, whereby, in the mystery of free personality, an evil will takes the place of a good one.​

​

Therefore, it is not wrong to conclude from the Scriptures cited that just as Satan attempted to deceive jesus and have Him worship Satan, so also will he attempt to deceive humans, irrespective of their salvation status because there is no verse in the Bible that indicates that a born-from-above person is immune from the influence of demons. Such is both contrary to Scripture, and naive.

It amazing to read such a defense of freemasonry at the expense of brothers in Christ. Makes one wonder if freemasonry isn't an idol to some

Mik, the "flip side" of your post is that some who call themselves "Christian" use their personal version of "Christianity" as a talisman, or a "goood luck belief to ward off evil. It is akin to those grade B horror movies where someone is supposed to ward off an evil being by showing them a crucifix. Anyone who dares to expose to them the futility of their sacred crucifix will experience scornful ridicule, and insults.

None dare tell the scorners that ridiculing the salvation from Jesus thet the ultimate source for thar blasphemy is no other than Satan, himself. But when you think of it, it HAS to be true because the blood of Jesus Christ on the cross, followed by His resurrection forever sealed the fate of Satan, and his minions.

So this represents a long, but true explanation of your statement above.

Further proof of the truth of my comments will be revealed in the tone and manner that posters respond. Ask yourself if the reply seeks to glorify Jesus Christ alone, and ask if if the Christians are ridiculed. then you will have first hand proof of what you correctly stated.

 

[kamaeq]

That alone should derail Satanism and Freemasonry as false when Lucifer was never the original name for Satan at all

Well, since Freemasonry doesn't teach anything about Lucifer, I'm not sure how that "derails" Freemasonry. The claims otherwise are based on the forged works of Leo Taxil who was soaking the RCC for coin in France or other authors who were not Masons when they wrote their "exposes".

 

[kamaeq]

It amazing to read such a defense of freemasonry at the expense of brothers in Christ. Makes one wonder if freemasonry isn't an idol to some.

Read John 8:44.
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. (Joh 8:44)

Those who follow that pattern of behavior are showing the fruit of those who do not follow Christ, but another. My duty as a Christian is to point out these errors, to give a defense of the faith and not allow it to fall into the hands of Pharisaical teachers spoken against in the Bible. Just because they claim to be "brothers in Christ" doesn't make them so.

Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit. O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. (Mat 12:33-35)

Note that I have repeatedly asked a certain poster to explain his one sentence comment, specifically, why would any Christian church teach the rituals of any secular fraternity? I will point to the multiple posts where a certain poster has done nothing but evade, blow smoke and refuse to defend or clarify that statement. Do you think that such evasion and lack of forthrightness in speech should be a sign or fruit of a brother in Christ?

Do you think those who perniciously cling to the false witness they bear should be considered brothers in Christ?

Do you think those who openly evade discussing Scripture and apparently lack any ability to do so as brothers in Christ?

Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. (2Ti 4:2)

Do you consider those that preach false doctrines as brothers in Christ?

Do you think that any who claim to be "brothers in Christ" then have a license to teach contrary to the Bible?

Unless you choose to answer all of those in the affirmative, then you will find your impression to be in error.

 

[kamaeq]

I fiind it a laugh when posters rely on their false learning rather than to seek source documents that far exceed the shallowness of non-learning.

From the ISBE (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

1. Names of Satan:​

The most important of these are the Hebrew and Greek equivalents noticed above. These words are used in the general sense justified by their etymological significance. It is applied even to Yahweh Himself (Nu 22:22,32; compare 1Sa 29:4; 2Sa 19:22; Ps 109:6, etc.). The word "Satan" is used 24 times in the Old Testament. In Job (1:6 f) and Zec (3:1 f) it has the prefixed definite article. In all cases but one when the article is omitted it is used in a general sense. This one exception is 1Ch 21:1 (compare 2Sa 24:1), where the word is generally conceded to be used as a proper name. This meaning is fixed in New Testament times. We are thus enabled to note in the term "Satan" (and Devil) the growth of a word from a general term to an appellation and later to a proper name. All the other names of Satan save only these two are descriptive titles. In addition to these two principal names a number of others deserve specific enumeration. Tempter (Mt 4:5; 1Th 3:5); Beelzebub (Mt 12:24); Enemy (Mt 13:39); Evil One (Mt 13:19,38; 1Joh 2:13,14; 3:12, and particularly 1Joh 5:18); Belial (2Co 6:15); Adversary (antidikos), (1Pe 5:8); Deceiver (literally "the one who deceives") (Re 12:9); Dragon (Great) (Re 12:3); Father of Lies (Joh 8:44); Murderer (Joh 8:44); Sinner (1 Joh 3:8)--these are isolated references occurring from 1 to 3 times each. In the vast​

​

In Hebrew grammar, the usage of the attached definite article (the) is significant because it signifies "the one and only" and there is one time where the article is omitted. The article explains that. If one is unfamiliar with Hebrew, the only resource one can use is unverifiable by independent investigation

2. Character of Satan:​

Satan is consistently represented in the New Testament as the enemy both of God and man. The popular notion is that Satan is the enemy of man and active in misleading and cursing humanity because of his intense hatred and opposition to God. Mt 13:39 would seem to point in this direction, but if one were to venture an opinion in a region where there are not enough facts to warrant a conviction, it would be that the general tenor of Scripture indicates quite the contrary, namely, that Satan's jealousy and hatred of men has led him into antagonism to God and, consequently, to goodness. The fundamental moral description of Satan is given by our Lord when He describes Satan as the "evil one" (Mt 13:19,38; compare Isaiah's description of Yahweh as the "Holy One," Isa 1:4 and often); that is, the one whose nature and will are given to evil. Moral evil is his controlling attribute. It is evident that this description could not be applied to Satan as originally created. Ethical evil cannot be concreated. It is the creation of each free will for itself. We are not told in definite terms how Satan became the evil one, but certainly it could be by no other process than a fall, whereby, in the mystery of free personality, an evil will takes the place of a good one.​

​

Therefore, it is not wrong to conclude from the Scriptures cited that just as Satan attempted to deceive jesus and have Him worship Satan, so also will he attempt to deceive humans, irrespective of their salvation status because there is no verse in the Bible that indicates that a born-from-above person is immune from the influence of demons. Such is both contrary to Scripture, and naive.



Mik, the "flip side" of your post is that some who call themselves "Christian" use their personal version of "Christianity" as a talisman, or a "goood luck belief to ward off evil. It is akin to those grade B horror movies where someone is supposed to ward off an evil being by showing them a crucifix. Anyone who dares to expose to them the futility of their sacred crucifix will experience scornful ridicule, and insults.

None dare tell the scorners that ridiculing the salvation from Jesus thet the ultimate source for thar blasphemy is no other than Satan, himself. But when you think of it, it HAS to be true because the blood of Jesus Christ on the cross, followed by His resurrection forever sealed the fate of Satan, and his minions.

So this represents a long, but true explanation of your statement above.

Further proof of the truth of my comments will be revealed in the tone and manner that posters respond. Ask yourself if the reply seeks to glorify Jesus Christ alone, and ask if if the Christians are ridiculed. then you will have first hand proof of what you correctly stated.

How nice.

So, care to tell all of us why any Christian church would be teaching rituals from a fraternal society?

Or will it be more smoke and mirrors evasion?

You do realize this appears like a drive by accusation that cannot be supported by even logic, let alone Scripture. It also appears to be itchy ears turning to fables with all the blather.

 

[John t]

You do realize this appears like a drive by accusation that cannot be supported by even logic, let alone Scripture. It also appears to be itchy ears turning to fables with all the blather.

Do you realize that you jump into a conversation having nothing to do with you personally just to throw out insults?

Do you realize that the discussion I made had nothing to do with you nor freemasonry, but you just had to throw out insulting zingers to me?

Do you realize that you "went out of your way just to attack me?

There is absolutely nothing in my post that points to you, or Freemasonry, so you imagine it to be so, and lash out. My post was to educate, but your posts to me are personal, and offending.

Is that how you seek to exemplify your unique combination of being a Freemason and being a member of the SBC ? If so, sign me up!

BTW I am under no obligation to answer any question that you have previously asked, nevertheless, I did, but because you did not like it, you repeatedly make the false statement that I did not answer it.

 

[SimpleMan]

it is not the concern of CARM what happens on other sites

 

[kamaeq]

Do you realize that you jump into a conversation having nothing to do with you personally just to throw out insults?

Do you realize that the discussion I made had nothing to do with you nor freemasonry, but you just had to throw out insulting zingers to me?

Do you realize that you "went out of your way just to attack me?

There is absolutely nothing in my post that points to you, or Freemasonry, so you imagine it to be so, and lash out. My post was to educate, but your posts to me are personal, and offending.

Is that how you seek to exemplify your unique combination of being a Freemason and being a member of the SBC ? If so, sign me up!

BTW I am under no obligation to answer any question that you have previously asked, nevertheless, I did, but because you did not like it, you repeatedly make the false statement that I did not answer it.

Nope, you didn't answer it yet... Let's see what you did do...

Post 22

You assume much about my post, and ALL of it is wrong.

Try to read again what I wrote because it is consistent with my sig lines. If you do not understand it, ask me to clarify, K?

The pertinent part of my reply in post 23

So, how about you explain how your one sentence fallacious statement implying that any "Bible Believing church" would teach something from Freemasonry.

Of course, I also made an accurate (so far) prediction in the same post.

I assume we are going to go back to the typical pattern of you never answering the clarifying questions asked of you, a.k.a. Never admitting a mistake. That would be a great place to start actually, why don't you explain why you think ANY Bible believing church would teach the cited Masonic ritual. That would be amusing.

Then your next reply (post 24) goes OT on how you are right regardless of if your source are proven less than truthful and another long rant ending up claiming you don't think I'm saved, apparently because of YOUR false belief that Freemasonry has a plan of salvation and because I refuse to add the work of leaving Freemasonry to the grace given us by God. NOTE: it does not contain the clarification you claimed you would give if asked and I asked you to do.

So, I again asked for clarification and pointed out the errors in your reply in your post 24. BTW, I again predicted (Yet Again, Correctly!!) you would refuse to answer the question of why would a "Bible Believing church teaching" be teaching any ritual from a secular fraternity?

Since then you have refused to answer the question for over six months, and appear to still be ducking that answer.

BTW, pointing our your errors are not insults.
Stating an opinion contrary to yours is not an insult.
Stating a fact you disagree with is not an insult.
Asking you to actually clarify what you meant in a post is not an insult.

To claim they are would be to bear false witness and might even possibly be a direct example of confession by projection.

So, let's get back answering the simple question you were asked almost seven months ago: Why would a Bible believing church teach anything from a secular fraternity?

Simple. Can you handle simple or will you continue to make my predictions true. Of course, you are under no obligation to answer, which is an answer all by itself that doesn't match with the superiority you claim.

 

[John t]

Nope, you didn't answer it yet... Let's see what you did do...

I am under no obligation to answer any question that you have previously asked. Because you did not like it, you repeatedly make the same false statement that I did not answer it.

Try as you may, you will get nothing further nor different from me.

 

[kamaeq]

I am under no obligation to answer any question that you have previously asked. Because you did not like it, you repeatedly make the same false statement that I did not answer it.

Try as you may, you will get nothing further nor different from me.

Thank you, repeated prediction fulfilled yet again.

Which shows everyone reading that your original post is nothing more than a red herring or non sequitur. I do believe someone likes to point out posters that deal in wishful thinking and logical fallacies.

Our purpose as freemasons is not that of a religion. Freemasonry lacks the basic elements of religion. Freemasonry is not a religion nor is it a substitute for religion.

Freemasonry advocates no sectarian faith or practise. We seek no converts. We solicit no new members. We raise no money for religious purposes. We have no dogma or theology. Religious discussion is forbidden in a masonic lodge thereby eliminating the chance for any masonic dogma to form. It offers no sacraments and does not claim to lead to salvation by works, by secret knowledge, or by any other means. The secrets of Freemasonry are concerned with the modes of recognition only and not with the means of salvation. By any definition of religion accepted by our critics, we cannot qualify as a religion. Freemasonry supports religion. Freemasonry is far from indifferent to religion. Without interfering in religious practise, it expects each member to follow his own faith.

Of course, this proves that Freemasonry is not a Christian fraternity, but then it never claims to be such. Instead, it is a secular fraternity.
The entire "Christian" antimasonic position requires that Freemasonry be a religion and is based on "proofs" that fall under the rubric of "a text without a context is a pretext for a proof text" and outright falsehoods.

The only valid reason for a Christian to not be a Freemason (like they might be part of a political party, social club or other secular groups) would be if an individual Christian feels that being a Freemason impairs their duties to God as a Christian. That Christian should not be a Freemason. On that subject, Christianity and Freemasonry are in 100% agreement.