# Are Mason's allowed to lie



## jvarnell (Sep 24, 2012)

Are Mason's allowed to lie for any reasion?  As I have been resurching for some of my thoughts in other threads I cam across the concept of "Taquia" which looks like a concept of lieing for certian out comes.


And it looks like so-called Peace is one of the three reasions.


----------



## JustinScott (Sep 24, 2012)

I say yes if the truth is to much for someone to handle and it will cause problems it is better for them not to know


----------



## Tony Uzzell (Sep 24, 2012)

Allowed to? Yes.

Encouraged to? No.

A Mason is encouraged to live a moral life. Does that mean he should never lie? That's like asking if any "good man" should ever lie. Is it okay to tell your wife, "Of course that skirt doesn't make your butt look big."? Is it okay to tell your elderly mother, "No, Mom, that hat doesn't look silly....not even with those extra flowers on it."?

Are "little white lies" okay while big whoppers about not seeing the guy who did the shooting while being questioned by the police not okay?

It's really a very complex question that's a lot bigger than "Are Masons allowed to lie?".

TU


----------



## JustinScott (Sep 24, 2012)

Tony Uzzell said:


> Allowed to? Yes.
> 
> Encouraged to? No.
> 
> ...




Agreed


----------



## JJones (Sep 24, 2012)

Agreed, it isn't a question of what you're allowed to do.

Tell the next woman that asks your opinion the truth and then you can come back and answer your own question.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 24, 2012)

Did anyone look up the word "Taquia" for context?  To me a lie is intintanal misouse of the trouth for gain.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 24, 2012)

JustinScott said:


> I say yes if the truth is to much for someone to handle and it will cause problems it is better for them not to know



 please lookup "Taquia" and see how you feel after that.


----------



## Pscyclepath (Sep 24, 2012)

The best guideline:  refer to the ties in your obligations.  What did you promise to do, or not do?

_(Note: something you ought to answer to yourself... not post back here!)_


----------



## Plustax (Sep 24, 2012)

It's Taqiyya.  

Sounds like "pot stirring" time.



jvarnell said:


> please lookup "Taquia" and see how you feel after that.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 24, 2012)

Plustax said:


> It's Taqiyya.
> 
> Sounds like "pot stirring" time.



Thanks this gave me a lot more info to read.  A friend living in the mid-east told me to look this up in conjunction with lieing.  So I thought I would pose it to y'all.


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 24, 2012)

Pscyclepath said:


> The best guideline: refer to the ties in your obligations. What did you promise to do, or not do?
> 
> _(Note: something you ought to answer to yourself... not post back here!)_



How do I know what questions are off limits here if I don't ask them?  And I do know what it is in the obligation but wanted to figure out how others felt.


----------



## Pscyclepath (Sep 24, 2012)

jvarnell said:


> How do I know what questions are off limits here if I don't ask them?  And I do know what it is in the obligation but wanted to figure out how others felt.



Not intending to jump on you there...  but some questions in Freemasonry are best answered by serching within your own heart...  e.g., just what does your obligation(s) mean to _you_, personally?  Based on the light you've received so far, what do you think about the issue?   And some things like this are often best answered over a cold Coke or cup of coffee, around the table in the lodge hall...  For you will not find Freemasonry within books, or out here on the internet.  You find it in the hearts and acts of your brothers, and ultimately within your own.  Faced with a certain situation, how are you going to employ your working tools and trestle board to deal with it?

(The ties in the obligations are esoteric, though, and not proper to be written in places like this...  hence the caution)


----------



## chrmc (Sep 24, 2012)

jvarnell said:


> How do I know what questions are off limits here if I don't ask them?  And I do know what it is in the obligation but wanted to figure out how others felt.



By using common sense. This post, as many of your recent ones, have a clear negative view on the Islam faith. Personally I don't know what your issue with it is, but I've stopped reading and responding to the threads where you are sharing your views. 
This is a masonic website. If you want to discuss masonry and Islam I'm sure that many people will participate. If you just want to find a reason to perpetuate that Islam is a "bad religion" I'm not going to participate. 

Remember your obligation and why you hopefully joined the fraternity. To make yourself a better man. I would say that tolerance should play a part some where in there.


----------



## dhouseholder (Sep 24, 2012)

jvarnell said:


> please lookup "Taquia" and see how you feel after that.



Its called "lying to save your rear". Taqiyya is that concept precisely. In some parts of the world, exposing your beliefs can be very harmful to one's health. I see absolutely no problem in bald-faced lying if it saves my life, or those of loved ones.


----------



## daddyrich (Sep 25, 2012)

Pot-stirring, indeed. Dude, we get it - you either do not like and/or do not trust Muslims. Maybe there should be a thread titled "Reasons why My Religion/or God is better than yours".  Again, you have BROTHERS who are devout Muslims and it doesn't interfere with their sincerity to the Craft. But if I were one of them, I'd worry about the sincerity of some of my "brothers".


----------



## jvarnell (Sep 25, 2012)

daddyrich said:


> Pot-stirring, indeed. Dude, we get it - you either do not like and/or do not trust Muslims. Maybe there should be a thread titled "Reasons why My Religion/or God is better than yours". Again, you have BROTHERS who are devout Muslims and it doesn't interfere with their sincerity to the Craft. But if I were one of them, I'd worry about the sincerity of some of my "brothers".



Well I did not mean to stir the pot where it sloshed into the beans, but I did want to reconcile the deferances of what I have learned as a Masion all the religions/dogma of the earth.  I am here to put out my hand and help a brother in need.  I just want to know when I do it will be excepted and given without strings.


----------



## dhouseholder (Sep 25, 2012)

jvarnell said:


> Well I did not mean to stir the pot where it sloshed into the beans, but I did want to reconcile the deferances of what I have learned as a Masion all the religions/dogma of the earth.  I am here to put out my hand and help a brother in need.  I just want to know when I do it will be excepted and given without strings.



I am not the Grand Master, but I am pretty sure I speak for 99% of all Masons when I say "if you have to lie to save your life, you will not be brought up on Masonic charges".


----------



## widows son (Sep 27, 2012)

Everyone lies and will lie many times in your life, pscyclepath makes a great point about masonry. Jvarnell if not telling the truth to someone because it might hurt them is not the right answer, if you lie you can be preventing them from bettering themselves, or knowing something that change a situation for the better in their life. Lying usually occurs when your ashamed or afraid of telling the truth. As for our obligations and I've been question by certain people on this forum on this subject and here is my answer: it's none of your business. Our obligations we took are personal and sacred to the individual. We agreed not to betray eachother as brothers and our order. As far as anti Muslim, there's no need for it, they are people who are flawed just like you. Nobody has the right to judge others, we all breathe oxygen and have red blood coursing through our veins


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

Gentlemen:
How does this fit into the discussion:





> Truth is a divine attribute, and the foundation of every virtue.  To be good and true is the first lesson we are taught in Masonry.  On this theme we contemplate, and by its dictates endeavor to regulate our conduct.  Hence, while influenced by this principle, hypocrisy and deceit are unknown among us, sincerity and plain-dealing distinguish us, and the heart and tongue join in promoting each otherâ€™s welfare, and rejoicing in each otherâ€™s prosperity.


I think the words 'endeavor' and 'influenced' are key to understanding the tenet.  Also worth contemplating is the last phrase, which points out that truth among Masons is paramount.



			
				widows son said:
			
		

> Nobody has the right to judge others


Actually we do, as civil, criminal and Masonic trials make clear.  There are many bases upon which judgment occurs, and we all have to know what basis our judgment rests upon before we can claim a proper judgment.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

Skip your not at mason so how can you speak as one? An what gives you the right to judge anyone? You have no right judging people, but again your religious conviction probably tells you otherwise


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

Skip you can read all the Masonic material out there of you want, but it means nothing if you don't go through the degrees, which is 80% of the experience. Reading about masonry doesn't make you a mason


----------



## Brent Heilman (Sep 28, 2012)

> Actually we do, as civil, criminal and Masonic trials make clear.  There are many bases upon which judgment occurs, and we all have to know what basis our judgment rests upon before we can claim a proper judgment.  Cordially, Skip.



I don't exactly think when widows son said nobody has the right to judge others I don't honestly think he was referring to the judicial system or the Masonic Trial system. I think he was referring more to the passage in the Bible that say "judge not lest ye be judged yourself". JMHO


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

Yes Brent that is what I meant. We have set laws that deal with offenders, but I don't have the right to judge you and vice versa


----------



## daddyrich (Sep 28, 2012)

So, this Skip isn't even a Freemason? He does seem to speak with some self-imposed authority. Now I will have to read his responses differently. Do you know this for certain?


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

widows son said:


> Skip your not at mason so how can you speak as one?


Glad to see you've found out that I'm not a Mason.  When I discuss Masonry, I use authoritative Masonic documentation as my basis.  I assume the GL means what it says, and base my conclusions accordingly.



> An what gives you the right to judge anyone? You have no right judging people, but again your religious conviction probably tells you otherwise


Who have I judged?  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

Brent Heilman said:


> I think he was referring more to the passage in the Bible that say "judge not lest ye be judged yourself".


Indeed so, but I believe the quote misapplied, and usually misunderstood.  Here's the full quote:





> â€œDo not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.  (Matt 7:1-2)


The verse is referring to the hypocrisy of judging someone for doing the same things you yourself have done.  It is not a proclamation against all judgment.  If it were, how could Jesus talk about false prophets in Matt 7:15 and how they are to be identified?  Is that not a judgment?  There are many examples of that. 

What scripture does warn about is condemnation, which is pretty much reserved to God.  But it is real clear that our judgments better be on a sound basis, and that we ourselves better not be guilty of the same act we are judging another for.

Close to home, if judging were prohibited, why do so many Masons participate in candidate balloting?  Are you not judging another?  Is not the investigating committee tasked to judge the candidate?  Does not the Lodge judge how well a man performs his proficiency examination before he is allowed to continue?  In fact, we judge all the time; but, as Jesus noted, you best not be hypocritical in your judgments.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

daddyrich said:


> So, this Skip isn't even a Freemason?


Indeed, I am not, have never been, nor have I ever sought to be.



> He does seem to speak with some self-imposed authority.


Not really a self-imposed authority, but rather with the authority of GL statements, upon which I base my conclusions.  



> Now I will have to read his responses differently.


Why?  I'd hold me to the same standards you hold any poster on this forum.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## Michael Hatley (Sep 28, 2012)

Skip, what is your purpose here?  I see you have VIP status, and so you have I assume contributed to the site.

You seem like a nice enough fellow, but I do believe we were warned on your arrival that you were a troll on another forum.  I like to give men the benefit of the doubt, but I'd like to know your motives, plainly and directly.  I nor anyone else mean you any ill will, but understand that the reward for doing charitable works in our community and generally trying our best to be good citizens are broken windows, derisive attitudes, vandalized cars and buildings, suspicion, and passive aggressive trolls that delight in winding us up and wasting the small ammount of time we actually have.  

So I'd appreciate your assurance you are not of that lot.


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

As far as I'm concerned skip you statements aren't valid. You clearly have some sort of agenda. You say you site from grand lodge, but there are many grand lodges in the world that control different jurisdictions. I don't usually believe a non mason when they speak about freemasonry simply because they haven't stepped foot in a lodge, gone through the degrees and learned from other brothers. Books will only get you so far. clearly your are one of them. You say you have no desire to become a mason but you emersed yourself in its lore. Jesus and Pat Robertson would be disappointed. You attach your religious opinion to freemasonry, and justify it with some Mumbo jumbo from "GL". You questioned the words in my obligation and you havent even taken one yourself. That offended me the most. Your judgmental and condescending towards others who aren't like minded, and intolerant of other faiths and cultures.


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

Freemasons take ballots because it's a democratic organization, and we don't judge the person, we see where he is at in his life and what he's willing to do for the lodge and the community as a mason. Also masonry doesn't want its name tarnished more than it already is, I'd say it's just being cautious.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

Michael Hatley said:


> Skip, what is your purpose here?


A fair question.  I'm here for the same purpose as you are:  to discuss Freemasonry.



> I see you have VIP status, and so you have I assume contributed to the site.


It seemed the right thing to do.



> I do believe we were warned on your arrival that you were a troll on another forum.


Not really sure in what context a troll is (it ranges from a supernatural being to a bag lady), but I'd hate to be considered one.



> I'd like to know your motives, plainly and directly.


How can one know what Masons think if he does not ask them?  How can one test his views on Freemasonry if he does not put them out for comment?  I have yet to start a thread on my own, but have chipped in where I thought it appropriate, and I'd assume that much about me could be determined from my comments.  If you wish to know how I view Freemasonry, I'd suggest you visit Ephesians 5-11 and/or Christian Forums (Unorthodox Theology) and search on my name.  You'll find chapter and verse on those web sites.  But my presence here is not to proselytize.



> So I'd appreciate your assurance you are not of that lot.


I'm not, but let my actions on this site prove or disprove that.  It is my intent to live by the site rules and be held to the same standards as everyone else.

Let me say that I take no offense at your questions, and am glad you took the time to state your concerns.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## Michael Hatley (Sep 28, 2012)

> If you wish to know how I view Freemasonry, I'd suggest you visit Ephesians 5-11 and/or Christian Forums (Unorthodox Theology) and search on my name. You'll find chapter and verse on those web sites. But my presence here is not to proselytize.




I did that.  I'm amazed, quite frankly.  Saddened that you would spend what is obviously a lot of time and intellect on such a cause, but I'm afraid no matter what I say to you will not be convinced to use your time on Earth more productively as you believe yourself to be on some sort of mission.

Brethren, his stated intention is to strike down Freemasonry at every turn, and to convert men from Masonry.  Simple as that.  The site mentioned are religious crusaders who see us as damned.

Take this into account in your interaction with him.  I suggest ignoring his posts outright.  If you choose to do otherwise, you will likely only provide him more fuel.  If I may say so without offense from the Brethren, he is a more skilled interlocutor than some here and will expend a lot of your energy if you allow him to.

Take my advice and leave him be.


----------



## crono782 (Sep 28, 2012)

T.N. Sampson said:


> Not really sure in what context a troll is (it ranges from a supernatural being to a bag lady), but I'd hate to be considered one.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

crono782 said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)


Got it; thanks.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 28, 2012)

widows son said:


> I don't usually believe a non mason when they speak about freemasonry simply because they haven't stepped foot in a lodge, gone through the degrees and learned from other brothers. Books will only get you so far.


At direct issue is who speaks for Freemasonry.  In general, many Masons believe what they will about the craft from their own experiences.  Not having such experience, I go to authoritative sources within a jurisdiction, which include:  ritual, GL training documentation, commentary from knowledgeable Masons and so forth.  My posting on the tenet of Truth, for example, is relevant only if I've quoted the ritual correctly.  As ritual is a key source of Masonic doctrine, it can be used to judge just what Freemasonry teaches.

Here's an example.  The MN GL makes this statement on their web page:





> We are men who believe in a Supreme Being, but may call Him by many names: God, Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, or the Great Spirit.  Religious Tolerance has been a hallmark of Masonry from its inception.


Coming as it does from the GL, it is a formal statement or teaching and can be seen as a doctrinal statement.  It is binding on MN, but not on any other state.  Any MN Mason can be questioned on such statements and he can choose to defend them or express reservations about it, but he cannot claim that the GL doesn't teach it.  To some degree, he may be seen as bound by that statement, whether he agrees or not.  The SC GL only admitted white candidates until at least 1975, as stated in its Ahiman Rezon of that year.  Were all SC Masons in agreement?  Or were all racists because they remained in that jurisdiction?  A tough question, with no clear answer.

Along the same lines, the MA GL makes this statement:





> _Invocation_ â€“ The candidate learns the principal concept that the Lodge operates under the direction and by order of the Supreme Architect of the Universe.
> 
> _Declaration of Candidate_ â€“ The candidate acknowledges the principle of trust in God. (_Freemasonry in Massachusetts â€“ Memberâ€™s Handbook_, pg. 41)


A Massachusetts Mason may dispute his own personal view of the statement, but he cannot claim that the GL does not teach it.  And the GL can be challenged on its veracity and meaning.

I learned some time ago that what a Mason believes about Masonry is not always what their GL teaches about Masonry.   Worse, few Masons seem to bother to read and study such material.  This is why I focus on GL materials:  they are the prime sources for what Masonry actually is in their jurisdictions.

A parallel exists in religion, most of which have an authority from which their claims are made.  If I make a claim about Christianity, it cannot be authoritively based on my personal views.  Rather, it must be proven on how well those views are based on black-letter Biblical statements.  Similarly, if I want to know what the Catholic Church teaches, I'll look to their Catechism, and not the personal views of my Catholic neighbor, whose views may not be correct.  He may be wrong, but the documentation published under the Church's authority certainly is correct and binding.

All that is what I mean by GL literature.  Quite simply, those GL documents state what Masonry is within the confines of their jurisdiction, and it's members receive their training based on the contents of that documentation.  Thus, I can use such documentation to determine just what Freemasonry teaches and stands for and be on solid ground with my conclusions.  Hope all of this explains where I'm coming from on that subject.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## daddyrich (Sep 28, 2012)

"Indeed, I am not, have never been, nor have I ever sought to be". 

Then, you sir, have an unhealthy fascination to immerse yourself in a group of which you want no part. Use your time more wisely, you won't get converts here to whatever your agenda is. And, no, I will not hold you to the same standards as anyone else here. That's my choice. Good luck with whatever it is you do. But, do please, turn your critical eye towards another book you quote from. That's good fun right there. 
Obliquely,
Rich


----------



## JustinScott (Sep 28, 2012)

jvarnell said:


> JustinScott said:
> 
> 
> > I say yes if the truth is to much for someone to handle and it will cause problems it is better for them not to know
> ...




I just did and I'm not on behalf of the Islamic meaning I feel that if the truth will cause harm to ones well being it should not be told.  I'm not saying I shouldn't be trusted I wouldn't lie to a brother but like the others said a little white lie isn't punishment for a public execution of hanging.


----------



## widows son (Sep 28, 2012)

Skip one day when you realize you wasted half of your life trying to take something down because you take what people wrote down in a book 2000 yrs ago as 100% undisputed truth. Im in agreeable with daddyrich, by you wanting to strike me down, I do not hold you at the same standard as anyone else either. I pity your intolerant soul
Widows Son


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 29, 2012)

widows son said:


> Skip one day when you realize you wasted half of your life trying to take something down because you take what people wrote down in a book 2000 yrs ago as 100% undisputed truth. Im in agreeable with daddyrich, by you wanting to strike me down, I do not hold you at the same standard as anyone else either. I pity your intolerant soul
> Widows Son


What ever happened to 'judge not?'  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## daddyrich (Sep 29, 2012)

We need to remember Internet Rule #4080, "Do Not Feed the Internet  Trolls." Wasted breath, Widows Son. All your very good points are informed because of your belonging to Freemasonry. Our desire for universal tolerance among all peoples rubs against the agenda of others who would prefer a more rigidly dogmatic  world.


----------



## widows son (Sep 29, 2012)

Very true, and thank you for your support brother, one day this guys world is gonna come crashing down. Again not judging just an observation from a week plus conversation with you.  skip, again your intolerance will come back to bite you in the a...., wait that would be an obscenity, bite you in the bum bum. Karma can be a bitc.... Well you know

Not worried about your future
Widows Son

Ps daddyrich can you inbox me I have a question or two


----------



## BryanMaloney (Sep 30, 2012)

Pscyclepath said:


> The best guideline:  refer to the ties in your obligations.  What did you promise to do, or not do?



Of course, interpreted strictly, this means that Masons cannot be undercover police officers.


----------



## BryanMaloney (Sep 30, 2012)

T.N. Sampson said:


> A parallel exists in religion, most of which have an authority from which their claims are made.  If I make a claim about Christianity, it cannot be authoritively based on my personal views.  Rather, it must be proven on how well those views are based on black-letter Biblical statements.


 

Amazing how that still manages to lead to contradictory claims. Look at the errors the Evangelicals teach based on their idiosyncratic interpretation of Scripture out of context, for example.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 30, 2012)

BryanMaloney said:


> Amazing how that still manages to lead to contradictory claims. Look at the errors the Evangelicals teach based on their idiosyncratic interpretation of Scripture out of context, for example.


Your first sentence is quite true, but you'd have to offer an example to support the view in the second.  There are some pretty strict rules in quoting an authoritative source (e.g., clear verses outweigh vague ones), but anyone can find support for a viewpoint if he distorts enough.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## scialytic (Sep 30, 2012)

*... ... ...*

T.N. Sampson Quote:

_"Similarly, if I want to know what the Catholic Church teaches, I'll look to their Catechism, and not the personal views of my Catholic neighbor, whose views may not be correct. He may be wrong, but the documentation published under the Church's authority certainly is correct and binding."_

Whether *he* would be right or wrong in regard to doctrine isn't of consequence if you were interested in what *he* believed. All Catholics, Baptists. and Methodists aren't going to necessarily follow and believe all doctrine that is taught by their sect. If you want to know what they believe, you need to know them or you are just looking at the surface (which is _great_ for arguing).

A man's relationship with God is a personal experience. There is nothing analogous between religion and Freemasonry (for me personally). I choose to enhance my relationship with God--not by being a Mason--but being a Christian. I happen to be a Mason as well, and that _relationship_ is encouraged and promoted by my Brothers.

Also, you are doing far more research than many of us Brothers. To most, this Fraternity is just that...a Brotherhood. To come on here and throw source documents in our faces is preposterous. That's like me framing my argument regarding your Christian faith by choosing various quotes and text from Pat Roberton, Richard Land and John Wesley to suit my points. Digging through the tombs of material written by _men_ and using them as fodder is pretty weak. The text only has meaning based on context; in which you are lacking.

It's more than just Dogma and GL decrees. They're there--but if you truly want to know Masonry--you have to go through it. Or at least have an open mind. Masonry is truly an individual experience, and the individual decides how it applies and molds them...not a GL or any other Mason (or anti-Mason for that matter). Until you can approach the subject with an open mind you're just chasing shadows...instead of dispelling them.


----------



## widows son (Sep 30, 2012)

This guy doesn't have an open mind, and doesn't think for himself or base his opinions off of things he experiences in life, he only uses the bible as an authority for any rationality on any subject. I've seen some of the things put out by him on masonry.


----------



## daddyrich (Sep 30, 2012)

" but anyone can find support for a viewpoint if he distorts enough. Cordially, Skip."

Physician, heal thyself.


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: ... ... ...*



scialytic said:


> Whether *he* would be right or wrong in regard to doctrine isn't of consequence if you were interested in what *he* believed. All Catholics, Baptists. and Methodists aren't going to necessarily follow and believe all doctrine that is taught by their sect.


Understand your point, but the issue is one of authority.  All religious groups have an authority that is relied upon as the basis of their teachings.  For Freemasonry, it is the GL, which expresses its views on various matters via publications such as their Code, Mentoring Manuals, training documents and the ritual itself.  These are formal statements of position, and are applicable only within the jurisdiction itself.  But they are binding on Masons within that jurisdiction.

Using your point, if I want to know what a Catholic believes, he can tell me; however, if I want to know what the Catholic Church teaches, I'd consult their authoritative documents, as he may or may note actually know.   Such documents are not always binding.  For example, a Catholic may not agree with the Church on its contraception policy, and certainly many don't.  To me, it leads to the question:  then why are you a Catholic?  If you reject a key teaching of the Church, and by such rejection you are committing a sin in the eyes of your hierarchy, just what do you gain by being a member?  And the hypocrisy by claiming to be a Catholic while rejecting its key doctrines seems pretty significant to me.  I'd assume that if a person wished to hold a view of God that differs from their church, by all means find another church.  As you pointed out:





> A man's relationship with God is a personal experience.


And nothing in his church selection should interfere with that.



> Also, you are doing far more research than many of us Brothers. To most, this Fraternity is just that...a Brotherhood.


I think you are right on both counts.



> To come on here and throw source documents in our faces is preposterous.


But wrong on that one.  As I've pointed out, the GL is the authority in your jurisdiction, and its authority is exercised through those documents that you seem to disregard.  I think you'd agree that Masonry is a very hierarchical organization.  One only need examine the powers of a WM and those of all GL officers to see the truth in that.  As well, what 'Masonry' is in any jurisdiction is not left to the definition of its members; rather, it's the prerogative of the GL itself.  The FL GL frames the issue concisely:





> Masonry is systematic, proportionate, balanced, and exists in the form of duties, laws and definite work, supervised and regulated, controlled through laws written and unwritten, expressed through Landmarks, traditions, usages, Constitutions, and By Laws, guided and directed through Officers vested with power and authority. When the candidate takes his Obligation it is to pledge himself to uphold that lawful system; when he salutes the Master and Wardens it is to signify his obedience to the legally constituted Officers! When he is willing to follow his guide and fear no danger he expresses his trust in, and loyalty to, the Fraternity, as should a child which as yet is unable to trust himself.  This new world is a lawful world in which caprice and arbitrariness have no part. It has a definite nature of its own, it is devoted to specified purposes, it is committed to well defined aims and ideals. Its members cannot make it over to suit their own whims or to conform to their own purposes; they must make themselves over to it, must conform themselves to its requirements. One does not become a Mason first in order to become a member; he becomes a member in order to become a Mason, and if there be in his nature anything that obstructs him, he must make use of his Working Tools to remove it. Among the first requirements demanded of the Apprentice is that he shall offer himself as a rough stone, to be shaped under Masonic laws and influences for a place in the Temple of Masonry.  (LSME Booklet 2, 2009, pg. 6)


FL is not alone in making such statements.  Two others, to my knowledge, make the same statements and several more make the same point using different words.

To repeat, in each jurisdiction is a GL which exercises authority over all subordinate Lodges and their members in accordance with laws written and unwritten.  Thus, what the GL publishes about Masonry in that jurisdiction is the truth in that jurisdiction.  The Mason can agree or disagree with it, but he cannot disregard it as though it has no meaning.  That is why I concentrate on such documents.  In short, they define Masonic viewpoints within their jurisdictions and they, plus all Masons in that jurisdiction, can be held accountable for them.  That a man refuses to accept then do not degrade from their authority.

I noted elsewhere that the SC GL demanded all candidates be white up until at least 1975.  Would you not agree that all SC Masons were therefore responsible for that racist policy as long as they remained members?  Would not the honorable man have expressed his opposition by resigning?  And if he did not, could his continued presence as a Mason in that jurisdiction indicate his agreement with the policy?  My experience in dealing with Masons has taught me that most Masons really don't understand what their GL actually teaches.  As you have noted, they are more interested, understandably so, in the brotherhood in the Lodge than what the GL has to say on most issues.



> That's like me framing my argument regarding your Christian faith by choosing various quotes and text from Pat Roberton, Richard Land and John Wesley to suit my points.


I disagree, as none of these men carry the authority upon which Christianity is based.  They are individuals who are sharing their view of Christianity which may or may not be correct.  They fall into the same category as Coil and Roberts, Freemasons whose opinion carry weight due to their extensive experiences in Freemasonry.  But, they do not override GL authority, just as Robertson, Land and Wesley do not override black-letter Biblical doctrine.



> They're there--but if you truly want to know Masonry--you have to go through it.


I think that view pretty much dates from the recent time when it became clear that the Blue Lodge rituals were no longer secret.  I have about 20 of them myself. 

If you look at the issue technically, though, what makes you a Mason is your obligation;what keeps you one is your dues card.  But I think the point you make deals with the transformation a man undergoes as part of the ritual itself, and that such transformation cannot occur just by its reading.   I am somewhat taken aback by the spiritual nature of the transformation, as I do not see how it occurs, by what force it occurs or by what authority Freemasonry makes the claim.  But such transformation must certainly be linked to the lecture about the NE corner.  I also doubt that anyone here would, or even could, answer those questions. 



> Or at least have an open mind.


I do indeed.  Though my writings on other forums may be found offensive to many on this one, you will find my conclusions based on GL literature, and not the rote repetition of what others have found out.  It's too bad I do not have recent TX GL literature (my Monitor from TX dates from the 19th century), as we could have an interesting conversation over its meanings.



> Masonry is truly an individual experience, and the individual decides how it applies and molds them...not a GL or any other Mason (or anti-Mason for that matter).


In a sense you are probably right; however, I don't think you appreciate how the GL looks at the matter.  As noted in the FL quote, the man is made over into something acceptable to Freemasonry.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## scialytic (Sep 30, 2012)

Mr. Sampson, you are quite the provoker. Subtle...but apparent enough. Please do me a favor and don't respond to my posts in the future. I will do the same for you. You are here for your own selfish motives. Take care and God bless.


----------



## widows son (Sep 30, 2012)

Give it up skippy, your not converting anyone here, your only embarrassing yourself, clearly nobody cares based on other peoples comments toward you. Your mission to destroy masonry WILL fail, and you will be left nothing but lost and wasted time


----------



## widows son (Oct 3, 2012)

PS can you cite your references? I'd like to have a look see


----------



## widows son (Oct 3, 2012)

One thing we need to remember that even though we are masons, we are still human and flawed. People have this idea that we are something else. If you consciously and pathologically lie all the time, then you are just doing damage to yourself, and making your fellow brothers look bad


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Oct 3, 2012)

widows son said:


> PS can you cite your references? I'd like to have a look see


If you are referring to a post of mine, please indicate which comment you are interested in looking into.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## Phre-massen.nash (Oct 3, 2012)

[h=3]Definition for *taquia*:[/h]
Web definitions:
Makes lies acceptable and deceptions honorable when dishonesty serves the Islamic purposes.. www.crossroad.to/glossary/Islam.htm


----------



## widows son (Oct 3, 2012)

Hey skip, can you cite some of your monitors? And the grand lodges which issue some of your info


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Oct 3, 2012)

widows son said:


> Hey skip, can you cite some of your monitors? And the grand lodges which issue some of your info


What do you want to know?  How many I have and from where?  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## widows son (Oct 3, 2012)

Yes to all plz


----------



## T.N. Sampson (Oct 4, 2012)

widows son said:


> Yes to all plz


Here is a list of GL materials I have on hand.  It is taken from an internal file I use, and I'm sure there are some minor errors among the dates.  But it's a good view of the library itself.

*Monitors:*  Alabama (1963, 1978), Arkansas (1954), California (1985), Florida (1965, 1974, 1984, 1995), Georgia (1940, 2011), idaho (1948), Illinois (1916, 1962), Indiana (1949, 1975), Iowa (1953, 1991), Kentucky (1921, 1990), Louisiana (1945), Maine (1877), Maryland (1922), Massachusetts (1954), Michigan (1944), Missouri (1952, 1989), Montana (1934), New Mexico (1954), New York (1951, 1993), North Carolina (1997), Ohio (1948), Oklahoma (1992), Oregon (1955), Pennsylvania (1965), South Carolina (1975, 2010), Tennessee (1923, 1953, 2010), Texas (1898), Vermont (1893, 1947), Washington (1921, 1949, 1952), West Virginia (1917), Wisconsin (1925)

*Ritual:*  California (1990, 2003), Florida (1997), Illinois (2005), Indiana (undated), Iowa (1951), Kansas (2011), Kentucky (2008), Maine (1952), Massachusetts (2002), Michigan (1963), Mississippi (1927), Missouri (1993), New Hampshire (1948), New Jersey (1973), New York (1960), North Dakota (1935), Ohio (1980), Vermont (1949), Washington (undated), West Virginia (1917), Wisconsin (1925).

*Degree Training materials (e.g., Mentor's Manuals, LSME, Candidate Guides, etc):*    Arkansas (undated), California (2010), Delaware (undated), Florida (2009-11), Georgia (2000), Illinois (2003), Indiana (various),  Iowa (2007), Kentucky (undated), Michigan (undated), Minnesota (2009), Mississippi (1986), North Carolina (2010), Nebraska (2008), New Mexico (undated), Ohio (2008), Tennessee (undated), Utah (undated), Virginia (2002-03), Wisconsin (2007), 

*Code/Constitution:*  Alabama (1963), California (1975), Florida (2010), Georgia (2011), Hawaii (2010), Idaho (2010), Illinois (2011), Kentucky (1995), Maine (2007), Massachusetts (2006), Minnesota (1915), Missouri (2006), Montana (1917), New York (1975), North Carolina (1977), Ohio (1945), Oregon (1949), Pennsylvania (1913), Tennessee (2012), Utah (2006), Virginia (1985), Washington (2003), Wisconsin (2007).

This is not an inclusive list, but I think it answers your question.  Cordially, Skip.


----------



## cutter2001 (Oct 7, 2012)

All of this started by a guy that can't spell very well.


----------



## widows son (Oct 7, 2012)

Lol


----------



## JJones (Oct 7, 2012)

cutter2001 said:


> All of this started by a guy that can't spell very well.



With all respect due from one brother to another, that came across as extremely rude and unnecessary.


----------



## jvarnell (Oct 16, 2012)

cutter2001 said:


> All of this started by a guy that can't spell very well.



Yes and thank you for noticing if I don't concentrate on spelling I can concentrate on the subject.  You know everyone has a short comming mine is spelling and not cognitive thinking.


----------

