Skip to content

Jay-Z = Freemason

March 3, 2010

Looks like Jay-Z is a confessed (by actions) Freemason.  So folks, I wouldn’t buy his music.  We know Freemasonry is basically Satanic worship at its core. Here are some videos talking about it:

To learn more about freemasonry and secret societies, see this video:

http://www.3angelstube.com/video/297/The-Secret-Behind-Secret-Societies

Advertisements
38 Comments leave one →
  1. March 12, 2010 12:00 pm

    “Freemasonry is basically Satanic worship”

    How do we know this?

    • March 12, 2010 2:47 pm

      Watch the video I linked at the bottom. Or google something like “freemason satanic”.

  2. March 16, 2010 2:00 pm

    Watched the video. Interesting, but makes most points without real reference or backup. When searching those two terms, I find the same thing: Points without factual backup, or accurate backup.

    So, I guess I’ll ask you. How do we KNOW this?

    • March 16, 2010 3:57 pm

      How do we know this? Simple logic.

      While watching the video, did you not see the sources he cited in his quotes? Did you not see the symbols, and the similarities with Freemason and Pagan symbols? I don’t know how you can conclude otherwise.

      • March 16, 2010 9:34 pm

        Most of his sources were either biased, or not sources at all, but his interpretations. I’ve also found similarities between almost any government, industry, religious, or other and some Pagan symbols.

        I tend not to jump to conclusions unless I find a direct link not biased by opinion (wherever possible).

      • March 17, 2010 1:45 pm

        “Most of his sources were either biased, or not sources at all, but his interpretations.”

        Really?! I’m not sure what you were watching but he was reading the quotes verbatim. He’d add some commentary, but most of the stuff he cites and reads from. Granted, I haven’t checked the sources but he’s careful to provide each quote with a source where we can check it ourselves.

        I agree, we have to be careful not to jump to conclusions and do our own digging, but from the vast sources out there that make the same claim, and very little evidence refuting it, it’s safe to say that freemasonry doesn’t uphold Christian standards.

      • March 17, 2010 5:20 pm

        I definitely watched. But you have to ask: Do his sources have a reason to distort information about an organization?

        A couple things I’ve learned about Freemasonry: One, they DO NOT uphold Christianity… only in that they admit people of all faiths — Jews, Muslims, etc. Another thing is that the Grand Lodges have a policy of not engaging doubters of Freemasonry. In this, they make themselves easier targets, but it’s like if some idiot calls you an alien… do you spend time trying to convince them otherwise, or do you just shrug and move on.

        But you mention in your other post – Morals and Dogma. It refers to the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry (something many Freemasons don’t involve with). Have you read about their York Rite? The degrees that require allegiance to Jesus Christ? Search on York Rite, and I think you’d be surprised. I was, as I didn’t think the Freemasons observed religion.

      • March 17, 2010 6:01 pm

        Let me ask you this, so I know where you’re coming from, are you a member?

        This is my understanding of freemasonry; basically that it was created by Jesuits (who’s main purpose was to undermine the reformation/protestant movement.) That’s why I liken the Catholic Church and Freemasons to be linked.

        York Rite/ Scottish Rite, to me are the same thing at its core. Some may ‘profess’ allegiance to Christ, but you have to judge the group by its purpose and mission.

        “Your point on Secondary means that you have to believe what he’s believed someone to have told him. Double-leap.”

        It would be if he was the only source. But the majority of info out there, credible or not, seems to have the same views.

        Reason to lie? From “exposing such groups”? Huge reasons: Fame, fortune, maybe he’s been spurned by one.

        Well, his whole series deals with end-time events based on the book of Revelation. I don’t think he just did the one on ‘secret societies’ to get fame/fortune, but to help viewers see the bigger picture, of what is transpiring in the background, in relation to Biblical prophesy.

        The other evidence is often tainted. Look at the sources. Most have an axe to grind.

        I agree. But we can’t ignore the vast majority of those who have the same views. They’re not making it up most of the time, some come from former members, are you going to say their testimony is totally off-base? Sure it may be skewed or biased, but I believe the speak from experience.

        I’ll try to see if I can find a copy of the book and check out some of the references.

      • March 18, 2010 4:13 pm

        I’m someone who is always interested in conspiracy theory, and have found interest in the groups where that mystery exists: Freemasonry, Illuminati, Bildeburg, CoFR, etc.

        Freemasonry as we know it was created as a link between the real masons guilds of old, and “speculative” masons — people who yearned also to improve themselves through knowledge. In any group that is successful, keeps to themselves, and is known to have knowledge (or at least knowledgeable people within) there exists great suspicion.

        I think your take on Scottish/York rites to be off. You may want to research a bit more on York Rite as it may change your opinions on it… if you’re open to that.

        “It would be if he was the only source. But the majority of info out there, credible or not, seems to have the same views.” — Be careful of this thought process. The majority of the world thought the world to be flat at one point, and we know how that turned out. The majority opinion is often the right one, but also can be ignorant of all of the facts as well.

        To your point on his reasoning, yes, he has a reason to lie. Is he lying? That’s unknown. But the reason is there. It’s not the only factor that discounts sources, but remember, many of his sources had reasons to lie for what I listed.

        “Sure it may be skewed or biased, but I believe the speak from experience.” Question is, do you know which is skewed or biased? Again, looking at the validity of sources, and considering I’ve seen what former employees, or members of groups do if they leave with a bad taste (i.e. fired, expelled, etc) and it’s typically not to accurately portray situations/facts.

        In these cases, I discount the sources, seek ones that may possibly be unbiased (if any exist), or go to the source. So in this guy’s case, I first look at the pretense, and his sources, almost all of which have a high chance of bias, and throw them right out.

    • March 16, 2010 4:09 pm

      I don’t know if this link will help you, it references books, written by ex-masons. I don’t know how much closer one can get except maybe actual confessions by top members:

      http://bibleprobe.com/freemasonry.htm

      The thing is, I don’t see many freemasons coming out and defending or denying such claims.

      • March 16, 2010 9:47 pm

        Here’s how I evaluate:

        P — Primary or secondary? Was this person an eyewitness to the event they are describing, or did they just hear about from someone else?

        R — Reason to lie? Who is the author? Does this person have a reason to hide the truth or distort the facts?

        O — Other evidence? Are there any other sources that can confirm what this person is saying?

        P — Public or private? Was this source meant to be read by the public, or was it a private communication? People are more likely to be honest in their private diaries than they are in a public speech.

        It seems that these people have failed some of this, and passed in others. Leaves it in doubt. However, when one of the first paragraphs of the link mis-quotes or distorts scripture that it then uses as a basis for argument, it loses any credibility.

      • March 17, 2010 1:56 pm

        “when one of the first paragraphs of the link mis-quotes or distorts scripture that it then uses as a basis for argument, it loses any credibility.”

        Well he hasn’t distorted it, it paraphrasing 2 John 1:9-10

        9 Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; 11 for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.

        Let’s evaluate using PROP:

        Secondary, the speaker wasn’t a firsthand mason, but supposedly knows some who’ve confided in him.

        Reason to Lie – None, I don’t see what he would gain from exposing such groups. He’s warning Christians about the dangers of being part of such societies, and does a good job showing the two sides to each club, one for the masses, and the real side for the upper echelon.

        Other Evidence – He quotes various other books/writers.

        Public – Seems Morals and Dogma and other books are available, though not readily.

      • March 17, 2010 5:11 pm

        The scripture you quote pertains to sinning, not Satanism. Basically, it means if you’re a sinner, and you don’t follow Christ, you are without god’s love. Furthermore, it only says that if you follow Christ, not just God, you have both watching over you. For instance, according to that site’s bastardization of the verse, Jews would be Satanic. As this is not by any stretch the case, the reference is bogus at best.

        Your point on Secondary means that you have to believe what he’s believed someone to have told him. Double-leap.

        Reason to lie? From “exposing such groups”? Huge reasons: Fame, fortune, maybe he’s been spurned by one.

        The other evidence is often tainted. Look at the sources. Most have an axe to grind.

        Have you actually done a simple search on what Morals and Dogma is and how it pertains to the Freemasons? I’ve done some research, albeit high-level, but find that you can’t use it to refer to Freemasons as a whole at all. Have you read it? That might be worth your time to then point out your own assertions for your point, or to dispel them.

      • March 17, 2010 8:24 pm

        I found a copy online here:

        http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/apikefr.html

        Just read a random chapter, 28. It sounds like its talking about the God of the Bible, but its very sly in slipping in pagan references.

        The Chaldeans of the plain worshipped Me, and the sea-loving Phoenicians

        worshipping “God”. If I remember correctly, Chaldeans and Phoenicians were pagan and worshipped the Sun, who Satan fashioned himself after (Isa 14:12-14).
        Talks about

        BAL, representative or personification of the sun, was one of the Great Gods of Syria, Assyria, and Chaldea… the word Bal or Baal….

        Talks about:

        “but rather worship Him in the deep solitudes of sequestered forests…”

        Bohemian Grove?

        Then it goes on talking about worship of nature, the sun and moon and other heavenly bodies, then lists the various civilizations that worshipped the sun. That flies in the face of what the Bible teaches. It lists all sorts of Pagan civilizations, Israel, was only mentioned once, “weeping for Thammuz (some pagan God)”

        Is that Satanic enough?

      • March 18, 2010 5:50 pm

        I’ll take you at your word that this was random.

        Your excerpt: “but rather worship Him in the deep solitudes of sequestered forests…”

        This is part of the following: “GOD is the author of everything that existeth; the Eternal, the Supreme, the Living, and Awful Being; from Whom nothing in he Universe is hidden. Make of Him no idols and visible images; but rather worship Him in the deep solitudes of sequestered forests; for He is invisible, and fills the Universe as its soul, and liveth not in any Temple !”

        I guess if you want to spin almost anything out of a partial sentence or thought it is possible. But this is clearly saying something very similar to the teachings of the bible, but also that you don’t need to be in a temple to worship. This is common in most Protestant beliefs.

        Remember, the ancient Hebrews from whom Christianity sprang originated in Egypt, but also inhabited Babylon. Many of their rituals that ended up in the bible and Christian practice are similar to many of the Egyptian mythos. Furthermore, Christians adopted Christmas (after the Roman pagan holiday) and added to it a regular practice of Santa Claus and a Christmas tree (both pagan) . I’m not moved by references to other cultures, especially by an organization that is not religious. Again, they don’t restrict membership to just Christians, but allow in anyone, one of their prerequisites is the belief in a higher power, but they do not determine which one.

        Now onto Scottish Rite, which I admittedly know only a little about. This is only a side organization, just like the York Rite (which is Christian only). From what I understand, you can be in both, but for non-Christians, you can follow the Scottish Rite. What it seems more to say is that they believe more in one God, the same God of the Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc. If you read, it’s basically saying that the God that watched over all humans is the same. Again, I don’t find this Satanic.

        It appears that you read more to find your quick point rather than to understand the full text. I haven’t read all of M&D, but have randomly sampled other parts, and it all seems pretty benign. Maybe I’ll find a smoking gun in another passage, but I’d be surprised. Frankly, if the Freemasons had a text that was Satanic, do you think they’d allow it to be public, risking the PR black-eye? It doesn’t make logical sense. I’d need to see something real, and damaging to make that conclusion, not just trying to read between lines that don’t appear (at least to me) to be there.

      • March 18, 2010 8:24 pm

        Are you a Christian, and believe in the Bible wholeheartedly? Just wanting to know so as to judge your knowledge of the Bible, so I can know where you’re coming from. I’m assuming you are. Let’s take that one passage you quoted.

        “GOD is the author of everything that existeth; the Eternal, the Supreme, the Living, and Awful Being; from Whom nothing in he Universe is hidden. Make of Him no idols and visible images; but rather worship Him in the deep solitudes of sequestered forests; for He is invisible, and fills the Universe as its soul, and liveth not in any Temple !”

        If you understand how Satan works, he counterfeits everything. Makes something similar, but different enough to make it his OWN. i.e. the Sabbath, shifting it to Sunday, but that’s a whole different argument. Now looking above, it looks like its talking about God of the Bible, but as you read on, its clear, its not. Firstly, God doesn’t require worship in sequestered forests? Where is that in the Bible.

        The Chaldeans were clearly not the people of God in the Bible, they were related to ancient Babylon (Ezek 12:13), yet it says they worshipped “Him”. Who’s Him? Clearly not the God of Israel, as Israel was His chosen people, the one he had a covenant with. We know Babylon worshipped all sorts of gods and had symbols, including the sun. Therefore using simple logic, if it’s not God, it must be the devil the Pike is referring to as “Him”.

        Thus Morals and Dogma talks about worshiping not God of the Bible, but a different god.

        Is the York Rite different? I don’t know. But the fact they are closely associated tells me in the background that at the upper echelons, they are the same, and are “preach a different message” for the masses and lower level members.

        That’s why I strongly suggest Christians to stay away from such groups, even if it seems harmless.

      • March 19, 2010 9:15 am

        Well the Bible says to “test” all things to see if it is from GOD.

        1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God.
        (1 John 4: 1-2)

        21Test everything. Hold on to the good. (1 Thes 5:21)

        I’ve been testing M&D. Let’s test these quotes. The Bible says God is the ONE true God, the supreme being. What does Pike say:

        M&D Chap. 14:

        The conscience is the very voice of Deity. Masonry, around whose altars the Christian, the Hebrew, the Moslem, the Brahmin, the followers of Confucius and Zoroaster, can assemble as brethren and unite in prayer to the one God who is above all the Baalim, must needs leave it to each of its Initiates to look for the foundation of his faith and hope to the written scriptures of his own religion.

        According to this Masonic site,
        http://askafreemason.org/topten/index.htm
        they say Freemasonry is not a religion:

        16) Is Masonry a Religion?

        Masonry is not a religion. But it is one of the few platforms where men of all faiths – Christians, including Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and men of every other faith – can come together because it is open to all men who believe in a Supreme Being; but religion is not discussed at Masonic meetings. Although Lodges open and close with a prayer and Masonry teaches morality, it is not a church or a religion. Masonry does not have a theology or dogma, it does not offer sacraments, and it does not offer the promise of salvation.

        Yet Pike and the Adept know otherwise:
        M&D Chap 13 – Royal Arch of Solomon:

        Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instruction in religion.

      • March 19, 2010 9:37 am

        Here is proof that there are TWO sides to Freemasonry, one for the masses, and one for those in the KNOW.

        Chapter 30, M&D

        The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.
        [The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry.

        Are you now convinced? You’re fighting a losing battle now if you continue to defend freemasonry.

  3. March 18, 2010 11:06 pm

    Yes, I was raised Christian.

    “Firstly, God doesn’t require worship in sequestered forests? ” — Neither does the text. It merely states that you don’t need to worship inside a temple.

    I was a bit confused on the references to the Chaldeans, knowing what I know from history, so I can see where you might find something curious, or possibly devious there. However, when they say “God is the principle of everything that exists, and the Father of all Beings. “, does this describe Satan? Not at all, and is not described this way by any imagination in anything (biblical or other) I’ve ever read, including this document. So again, just like if Christmas has its roots in pagan tradition, we don’t necessarily accuse Christians of being Satanic, I don’t think that a couple of choice excerpts make this a smoking gun. There needs to be something more substantial.

    • March 19, 2010 1:10 am

      “Yes, I was raised Christian.”

      Ah okay… I see where you’re coming from. From that statement, I’m guessing you’re not one right now, as in, you don’t believe that the Bible is THE inspired word of God anymore? I just have to see what you’re coming from. I’m also assuming that you haven’t really studied the Bible for yourself then, and hence don’t fully understand my position.

      As a Christian, I believe that there is only one God, and there continues to be a conflict between Him and Satan. In the OT, God was the God of the Israelites, and all other nations (Egyptians/Assyrians/Chaldeans/Babylon etc) were influenced by Satan. Hence idol worship, many gods, etc…. If you look at the 10 Commandments, Satan has influenced these nations to practically break all of them, and that’s his goal today. Just like Israel was the light of the world back then, so are certain Christians today which have certain traits, for example, they worship God, and God alone, they keep ALL of God’s commandments, basically, by their fruits you can tell.

      So in light of this, does freemasons and all their teachings live up to the standard of the Bible.

      No. Scottish Rite, York Rite, Whatever path, freemasonry is freemasonry, and I believe at the elite levels, they really know what’s going on. Hence the later chapters/higher levels misleading readers that the “God” it talks about is really Satan.

      My purpose in highlighting the Chaldeans was this, Morals and Dogma said the Chaldean’s worshipped “God”. The Bible says otherwise, that they were a pagan nation that worshipped BAAL. This is even confirmed in the same chapter (28) in Morals and Dogma.

      Therefore, the “God” in Chapter 28, is not the God of Heaven, but someone else, someone who wants to be worshiped like God…. Satan. Catch my logic? I hope you see it now.

      Who said Christmas was a “Christian” religion? Most Christians who know their Bible know Christ wasn’t born on the 25th of Dec, it was a holiday utilized by the Catholic church, and I can’t say they represent the Christian church like they claim.

      • March 19, 2010 9:10 am

        Actually, I know the bible extremely well.

        “In the OT, God was the God of the Israelites, and all other nations (Egyptians/Assyrians/Chaldeans/Babylon etc) were influenced by Satan. ” — This is where I’m wondering if YOU’VE read the bible much, or had it read to you with someone else’s interpretation added. It seems like you pick and choose scripture to prove points as opposed to try to understand the real meaning.

        Keep in mind, the bible is not the same one that was written years ago. It has changed over the years through interpretation, exclusion, and even scribes adding their own stories that they felt were in line with the scripture, but were not in the source. You may want to go study an Eastern Orthodox version to pick out some of the differences.

        To bring this to Freemasons… they are not a religion, so I think you’re making a leap that is not there. Your connection from Scottish Rite, an offshoot of Freemasonry, is sort of like saying because there are Log Cabin Republicans, then all Republicans must be practicing homosexuality… they just don’t know it because some inner circle keeps them from it.

        “it was a holiday utilized by the Catholic church” — Really? Then how come EVERY Christian church has service/mass on the Christmas eve, and most on the day? How come, in most Christian homes, there are Christmas tree, and if there are kids, they hang stockings for ‘old St. Nick’ which they are taught is real for the first few years of their life?

        Why is it that a pagan drove the creation of the New Testament? You can twist and turn what you want and exclude what you want. I tend not to read everything literally as what we read today has some difference to the original form. Therefor, I take from it the spirit and overall meaning as opposed to an interpretation of what had been translated, and re-translated, and re-transcribed over the years.

      • March 19, 2010 9:44 am

        Actually, I know the bible extremely well.

        Then you’ll understand that the “True” Christian church would be in hiding during the Dark Ages, according to the book of Revelation. The supposed “Christian” church at the time introduced all sorts of pagan practices into the “church”, Sunday worship, Christmas, Easter celebrations etc. None of it is Biblical. So be careful to paint pagan practices that have been adopted as “Christian”, when the true churches recognize that they are pagan to begin with.

        “In the OT, God was the God of the Israelites, and all other nations (Egyptians/Assyrians/Chaldeans/Babylon etc) were influenced by Satan.” This is where I’m wondering if YOU’VE read the bible much, or had it read to you with someone else’s interpretation added. It seems like you pick and choose scripture to prove points as opposed to try to understand the real meaning.

        Then show me where I’m wrong, instead of making a baseless claim. Show me in the Bible that the Egyptians/Babylonians/Chaldeans were the people of God? History/Archaelogy has also proven that they worshipped idols and many gods. How can you say they worshipped the true God?

        Keep in mind, the bible is not the same one that was written years ago. It has changed over the years through interpretation, exclusion, and even scribes adding their own stories that they felt were in line with the scripture, but were not in the source. You may want to go study an Eastern Orthodox version to pick out some of the differences.

        I know the OT is was solidly and meticulously preserved by the Jews. If you study textual criticism, its something like 98% accuracy, with minor errors between the various manuscripts (strokes, repetition, letters in wrong places,). The fact that its been preserved to such extent til today is a miracle itself, and a testament to God’s guidance. The NT is more complicated, and there’s ongoing debate such as the KJV Onlyism etc.
        Point is, the Bible is solid, and history and recent archaeology back up the facts in the Bible.

        To bring this to Freemasons… they are not a religion, so I think you’re making a leap that is not there.

        Read my comment above that talks about Freemason’s claiming to not be a religion.

        Why is it that a pagan drove the creation of the New Testament?

        Where are you getting this from? This is the first time I’ve heard such a claim. Care to elaborate? Are you sure you really know the Bible?

      • March 19, 2010 3:24 pm

        Where you’re having a disconnect, is that you’ve fixated on a book used by some of those in an off-shoot of Freemasonry. Furthermore, it was only in use for the southern district of that off-shoot. Even further still Morals and Dogma is no longer used by them. This is public knowledge. Even if it were, step back to my ‘Log Cabin’ reference.

        To clarify, I was referring to the Roman Emperor Constantine who convened the Council of Nicea. Constantine was born a pagan, who later ‘converted’. The council of Nicea ‘decided’ on several issues that most Christians now take as the word of god (things like whether the father and the son where the same or different). Later, other verses were added (such as the story of the adulteress). Due to these many facts of history, we have to be careful when reading and quoting this piece literally.

        So back to Freemasonry. Here’s what we know: They are an organization with secrets. But this does not make them bad. There may be some here or there that have bad intentions, but there aren’t many large groups with humans in them that don’t. The Freemasons don’t recruit, so I don’t see them as trying to spread a message.

        I’m not defending Freemasonry, I just am pointing out that your logic pattern has had some serious holes from faulty scripture, outdated reference, and biased information. From this, your foundation was shaky at best, and makes it impossible to prove this point. Hence when I asked my original question, I was hoping to hear something other than grasping conjecture, but something like “I am one, and after being one for years, this particular part of what they do became apparent, and caused me to think this way”. So I guess we don’t KNOW, do we? When we don’t know, it’s very difficult to state fact…

      • March 19, 2010 7:26 pm

        I think you need to follow the “rules” from your blog. Facts and links to back up your claims please. I’m going to limit my involvement after this, as you seem to be making claims without anything to back up your statements, and pointless to continue on.

        Where you’re having a disconnect, is that you’ve fixated on a book used by some of those in an off-shoot of Freemasonry. Furthermore, it was only in use for the southern district of that off-shoot. Even further still Morals and Dogma is no longer used by them. This is public knowledge.

        Please post links/proof to support the above. Right now its just empty claims to me. In fact, send me some links to some reputable York Rite or Other sects of masonry that dispels the notion of them being Satanic at the core. I made the assertion that they are Satanic, at least the Scottish Rite, and I proved it. The least you can do is provide some proof defending the others. If its true, it should be readily available.

        To clarify, I was referring to the Roman Emperor Constantine who convened the Council of Nicea. Constantine was born a pagan, who later ‘converted’. The council of Nicea ‘decided’ on several issues that most Christians now take as the word of god (things like whether the father and the son where the same or different). Later, other verses were added (such as the story of the adulteress). Due to these many facts of history, we have to be careful when reading and quoting this piece literally.

        Like I told you before, the Catholic Church does not represent the “true church”, it in fact represents the Harlot riding on the Beast of Revelation. You’d do well to study that book.
        John predicted the true church would be in hiding throughout the dark ages, and the Bible is still preserved. (See here for a quick study)

        I just am pointing out that your logic pattern has had some serious holes from faulty scripture, outdated reference, and biased information.

        Yet you can’t seem to back up that claim. You seem to be guilty of that accusation.

        I’m not defending Freemasonry, I just am pointing out that your logic pattern has had some serious holes from faulty scripture, outdated reference, and biased information. From this, your foundation was shaky at best, and makes it impossible to prove this point. Hence when I asked my original question, I was hoping to hear something other than grasping conjecture, but something like “I am one, and after being one for years, this particular part of what they do became apparent, and caused me to think this way”. So I guess we don’t KNOW, do we? When we don’t know, it’s very difficult to state fact…

        Oh come on, will a former member be the only way you’ll be convinced???? Well there’s no point in this discussion then. How do things work in the court system??
        You’ll rarely see a murderer confess to his deeds, yet the vast amount of evidence gathered points to his guilt. Same with this, that beyond a reasonable doubt, Freemasonry has satanic roots. Come on now… you know you can’t prove that they’re not Satanic at the core, that’s my point. Its pretty indefensible, given all that I’ve shown you. You have yet to refute one claim with solid evidence, just your own opinions or understanding. NONE. So if you’re going to continue to argue just for the sake of debate, I’ll leave it at that.

      • March 23, 2010 3:53 am

        “Please post links/proof to support the above”

        I’ll use your own link from which you’ve referenced: http://www.freemasons-freemasonry.com/apikefr.html . If you go beyond the hunt-and-peck method of reading, you’ll see in the last paragraph “Morals and Dogma was traditionally given to the candidate upon his receipt of the 14th degree of the Scottish Rite. This practice was stopped in 1974.” I hope this helps.

        “Yet you can’t seem to back up that claim. You seem to be guilty of that accusation.”

        Actually, quite the opposite. I’ve asked how you KNOW. You gave links or sited sources that either were quite biased, so you couldn’t KNOW if they were legitimate, or in one case, actually completely changed scripture to try to prove a point. I used the text that you used to simply either show that you took out of context, or were siting something inaccurate. The logic is simple: Come up with a smoking gun, or you don’t KNOW, you hypothesize… which is what you’ve done, but with some incorrect assumptions.

        “Oh come on, will a former member be the only way you’ll be convinced???? ”

        No, but again, you’ve used outdated, inaccurate or completely false sources more than once. This takes the rug out from under the argument, and reduces it to a rigid belief you have. I don’t think I’m going to change your beliefs, and neither do I want to. However, please rethink your source-vetting process when pitching your point.

      • March 23, 2010 8:25 am

        You forgot to add this:

        A Bridge to Light, by Rex R. Hutchens, is provided to candidates today. Hutchens laments that Morals and Dogma is read by so few Masons. A Bridge to Light was written to be “a bridge between the ceremonies of the degrees and their lectures in Morals and Dogma.”

        “No, but again, you’ve used outdated, inaccurate or completely false sources more than once.”

        Can you show me how they are “outdated, inaccurate, or completely false”. Can you refute each claim the guy made in the video? How do you know they are biased??? Can you prove it? Like I asked you before, show me sources that say OTHERWISE. If not, you have no case.

      • Don permalink
        March 23, 2010 8:55 am

        Loudelf, please show us proof man.

        I was reading the comments and you haven’t proven anything. Not one source or link to back up your words, or matter fact, to prove that any of the sources EG used are wrong. At least EG was able to prove the scottish rite has satanic roots, you haven’t shown anything.

      • March 23, 2010 1:38 pm

        He did provide one link, but its the one I’ve already used.

      • March 25, 2010 10:14 am

        The burden of proof, is not upon me. I’m not the one making the accusation. All he’s been able to do is either quote biased source, or take excerpts which have a different meaning than the whole text. Where my issue has been is not so much in the point, but if it was valid. So far, with the weakness of source, it’s only an opinion as opposed to fact.

        There really isn’t anything to say beyond that.

      • Don permalink
        March 25, 2010 1:51 pm

        Loudelf,

        He’s been able to back up his claims. I find his argument compelling.

        Yours, not so much. You haven’t shown anything to back up any of your statements about “biased sources” or any other claims. So far with the weakness of your argument, your comments are only opinion as opposed to fact.

        There really isn’t anything to say beyond that.

      • March 25, 2010 3:08 pm

        Don,

        Almost ALL of his sources have been biased. These are not independent historians who are pitching all sides of a point, these are people with axes to grind in most cases, or looking for fame or monetary gain. If you read any of his points, I’ve gone case by case and pointed out where he’s used poor sourcing, and explained why, to many of the points HE HAS AGREED.

        So you’re right, there isn’t anything to say beyond that. Again, I’m not making accusations, so I don’t need to prove my point. But he’s made some claims, and I’ve simply pointed out that they are erroneous. If it’s above your head, I can’t do much about that.

      • Don permalink
        March 25, 2010 5:08 pm

        LE,

        Can you point me again to where you prove the sources are biased? I scanned the comments above and you haven’t shown any conclusive proof that they are indeed “biased”.

        I’ve watched the video too, and Veith quotes various historians and such, not relying on one or two sources. So I don’t know how you can say the sources are biased.

        You don’t need to prove your point? I believe EG has claimed they have satanic roots as per the post, and he has shown us from citing straight from the horses mouth (Morals & Dogma) that it is indeed true. From what I’ve read of your comments, your point is that they are not satanic, yet you can’t seem to back it up with any conclusive arguments. All we see is that EG’s sources are flawed, biased, etc according to you, which again you haven’t shown why they are biased.

        So from reading his arguments, I have to agree with EG that freemasons are a shady organization with Satanic roots.

      • March 25, 2010 5:19 pm

        Hey guys,

        This is my initial point. Freemasonry is something Christians shouldn’t be involved with, as it has satanic roots. Just the numerous occult and pagan references in their various publications lead me to believe it. Most masons probably don’t know it, I’m pretty sure the elite/top tier masons do.

      • April 19, 2010 9:13 am

        How is this as an insider source? Watch 2:05-2:15. He says “most of the people involved in Freemasonry really don’t know about this stuff [satanic/occult practices]…other secret societies take their members from the elite of freemasonry”

      • March 23, 2010 8:48 am

        Here’s a review on A Bridge to Light, the book that ‘replaced’ Morals and Dogma:

        http://www.preciousheart.net/fm/Bridge.pdf

  4. Don permalink
    March 22, 2010 10:20 am

    dude got owned. not once did he answer any of your questions when you challenged him.

  5. October 15, 2010 6:28 pm

    This stuff is down right evil and completely lines up with the word of GOD.
    God tells us in the book of Isaiah 14:12-16 how satan will be “like” GOD…He said in Verse 14 He will make himself LIKE the most high. This reveals that he is NOT te truth and the life. Also in 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 it states ” And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    Be not fooled my fellow man…But Seek Wisdom and knowledge of Jesus Christ and know the TRUTH!

  6. Anonymous permalink
    June 22, 2012 10:55 am

    drool and drivel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: