OK, fair enough you got me pegged.

Your questions are all totally legit and it is silly of me to take any offence to the claims being repeated by you and posed as “questions”. I won’t respond to you anymore, other than to say just re-read what I wrote previously and try to think about what I wrote.

In the meantime good luck and I hope you find what you are looking for.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

Then what did you set up the website for?  Why even bother having a thread for controversal subjects ‘get the real answers from real freemasons’.  It is my opinion that you are making broad assumptions based on me asking legitimate questions. 

You asked silly questions based on a book that is well known to be a bunch of lies. After this was pointed out to you from several people, you made other silly statements claiming they were legitimate questions. Every one of those “legitimate questions” is addressed in web sites we have directed you to. Did you make the least bit of effort to do a little research? No, you came back here and poked us some more.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

I think you are just miffed that I am asking legitimate questions that you don’t like answering that I am perfectly entitled to ask.  It is my opinion that you are forming this argument based on the position you think you hold and are going ‘who are you to ask that’?  The point is, I have read all this conspiracy stuff and would not consider myself a good man going into freemasonary WITHOUT asking these questions. 

You stopped asking legitimate questions a couple of pages back. We told you your sources were lies and pointed you to reliable information which you ignored. Of course I’m “miffed”. It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

You seem to think I am not a good man for trying to get legitimate answers to debunk these theories.

You got your answers. You just refuse to acknowledge the truth.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

Like I said, you swear to bloody oaths, it’s not overtly obvious to the uninitiated that it’s nothing sinister.  I now know that it’s figurative which is actually what I assumed it to be, but not to everybody.  My father was a good man and he didn’t join the freemasons because you swear to these oaths; my grandfather was a freemason.  Don’t make the mistake of looking at everybody that asks you questions as not being good men because then you make the mistake of thinking that you’re something special more than everybody else.

The oaths I swore had the penalties of “reprimand, suspension or expulsion” from the fraternity. Hardly bloody oaths. You continue to believe what you read in a book and saw on youtube videos while ignoring what good men have patiently explained to you.

I issued you a challenge. I looked at your profile and, as expected, found not a single thing there. It’s easy to sit behind an anonymous persona on an internet forum and poke at us. I challenged you to have a talk with a real Mason, in person, man to man. That’s the way Masons do it. We meet on the level as equals. If you are serious about joining the Gentle Craft, then you need to take that simple step. Turn off the computer and talk with a real Mason in person. If you can’t summon the courage to take that simple, logical step then you certainly not the kind of man we are looking for.

windrider - 04 January 2012 08:52 PM

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

Then what did you set up the website for?  Why even bother having a thread for controversal subjects ‘get the real answers from real freemasons’.  It is my opinion that you are making broad assumptions based on me asking legitimate questions. 

You asked silly questions based on a book that is well known to be a bunch of lies. After this was pointed out to you from several people, you made other silly statements claiming they were legitimate questions. Every one of those “legitimate questions” is addressed in web sites we have directed you to. Did you make the least bit of effort to do a little research? No, you came back here and poked us some more.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

I think you are just miffed that I am asking legitimate questions that you don’t like answering that I am perfectly entitled to ask.  It is my opinion that you are forming this argument based on the position you think you hold and are going ‘who are you to ask that’?  The point is, I have read all this conspiracy stuff and would not consider myself a good man going into freemasonary WITHOUT asking these questions. 

You stopped asking legitimate questions a couple of pages back. We told you your sources were lies and pointed you to reliable information which you ignored. Of course I’m “miffed”. It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

You seem to think I am not a good man for trying to get legitimate answers to debunk these theories.

You got your answers. You just refuse to acknowledge the truth.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 05:49 PM

Like I said, you swear to bloody oaths, it’s not overtly obvious to the uninitiated that it’s nothing sinister.  I now know that it’s figurative which is actually what I assumed it to be, but not to everybody.  My father was a good man and he didn’t join the freemasons because you swear to these oaths; my grandfather was a freemason.  Don’t make the mistake of looking at everybody that asks you questions as not being good men because then you make the mistake of thinking that you’re something special more than everybody else.

The oaths I swore had the penalties of “reprimand, suspension or expulsion” from the fraternity. Hardly bloody oaths. You continue to believe what you read in a book and saw on youtube videos while ignoring what good men have patiently explained to you.

I issued you a challenge. I looked at your profile and, as expected, found not a single thing there. It’s easy to sit behind an anonymous persona on an internet forum and poke at us. I challenged you to have a talk with a real Mason, in person, man to man. That’s the way Masons do it. We meet on the level as equals. If you are serious about joining the Gentle Craft, then you need to take that simple step. Turn off the computer and talk with a real Mason in person. If you can’t summon the courage to take that simple, logical step then you certainly not the kind of man we are looking for.

My other legitimate questions was about blacklisting because it was well known that the orange lodge did that for a while even though I know that the masons are nothing to do with the orange lodge (but they use similar symbology the eye of the pyramid being one).  The oaths that you say personally may not be the bloody oaths but as with an earlier reply this varies from lodge to lodge and some of the oaths are bloody; why don’t you have a look at the thread ‘bloody oaths’?  Yes I had a look at all the links and my point was and still is that the bloody oaths do look sinister to the uninitiated.  If you cannot handle that then I’m very sorry.  You seem to think that all uninitiated people are all conspiracy nuts which means that you yourself think that you are something special.  I will talk to a mason man to man but I thought that I’d make use of the website.  Why set up the website in the first place if I cannot ask questions and get answers without someone going ‘you’re a conspiracy nut’ or being insulted for asking them.  The book ‘Inside the Brotherhood’ is only well known among masons to be a bunch of lies, I simply had to address it and I do also think that it is a bunch of lies thanks to the answers you gave but there is no need for you to be conceited about it.  That’s what the website is for is it not and I think that you would be glad that I gave you the chance to explain to me that it was a bunch of lies rather than me ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ and being anti masonic (which I am not).  A book managed to be published with lies on the freemasons.  The fact that it is published means you have to address it or are you going to use this website to say that the freemasons shouldn’t answer to a book about them because it seems to me that someone even merely mentioning the book who is uninitiated gets made out to be a freak on this board.  Hardly scratching the surface of correcting the issues that some people have with the masons (which is the whole purpose of the website in the first place).  I even posted in the correct place.

Mike Martin - 04 January 2012 06:16 PM

OK, fair enough you got me pegged.

Your questions are all totally legit and it is silly of me to take any offence to the claims being repeated by you and posed as “questions”. I won’t respond to you anymore, other than to say just re-read what I wrote previously and try to think about what I wrote.

In the meantime good luck and I hope you find what you are looking for.

Thanks Mike.  I didn’t make any claims but I did pose them as questions for which they are.

Wind rider and others. When this poster mentions “bloody oaths” he is correct that we had straightened all of that out in another thread. Some lodges actually recite them. Others (as in Mass. ) only allude to them. Let’s leave that discussion alone as the poster seems to grasp the concept.

Curious, I personally don’t find your questions insulting, but I can understand why others do. I hope you feel that you can still ask your questions here. I’d hate to see anyone who truly wants knowledge to go away dissatisfied.

At this point I think sufficient material has been recommended to clear up most confusion.  It now becomes the your responsibility to take those reccomendations and do some offline learning. I think that’s the best we can do right now. Of course if you feel like you can’t get further response without offense, feel free to send me a PM with your question.

My other legitimate questions was about blacklisting because it was well known that the orange lodge did that for a while even though I know that the masons are nothing to do with the orange lodge (but they use similar symbology the eye of the pyramid being one).

Don’t you see that this comes across as “well you say they’re not masonic but I know otherwise”?

The book ‘Inside the Brotherhood’ is only well known among masons to be a bunch of lies, I simply had to address it and I do also think that it is a bunch of lies thanks to the answers you gave but there is no need for you to be conceited about it.

A book managed to be published with lies on the freemasons.  The fact that it is published means you have to address it

I’ve already said that it’s been covered - the address I gave you came from a simple Google search, so to say ‘only known among masons’ is simply not true.

All I ask is that you do some simple Google searches first, and then ask questions if you’re unsure about what answers you get.  And remember to treat any non-masonic website or statements by non-masons with caution.  That’s all I ask.

curious100 - 04 January 2012 09:23 PM

My other legitimate questions was about blacklisting because it was well known that the orange lodge did that for a while even though I know that the masons are nothing to do with the orange lodge (but they use similar symbology the eye of the pyramid being one).  The oaths that you say personally may not be the bloody oaths but as with an earlier reply this varies from lodge to lodge and some of the oaths are bloody; why don’t you have a look at the thread ‘bloody oaths’?  Yes I had a look at all the links and my point was and still is that the bloody oaths do look sinister to the uninitiated.  If you cannot handle that then I’m very sorry.  You seem to think that all uninitiated people are all conspiracy nuts which means that you yourself think that you are something special.  I will talk to a mason man to man but I thought that I’d make use of the website.  Why set up the website in the first place if I cannot ask questions and get answers without someone going ‘you’re a conspiracy nut’ or being insulted for asking them.  The book ‘Inside the Brotherhood’ is only well known among masons to be a bunch of lies, I simply had to address it and I do also think that it is a bunch of lies thanks to the answers you gave but there is no need for you to be conceited about it.  That’s what the website is for is it not and I think that you would be glad that I gave you the chance to explain to me that it was a bunch of lies rather than me ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ and being anti masonic (which I am not).  A book managed to be published with lies on the freemasons.  The fact that it is published means you have to address it or are you going to use this website to say that the freemasons shouldn’t answer to a book about them because it seems to me that someone even merely mentioning the book who is uninitiated gets made out to be a freak on this board.  Hardly scratching the surface of correcting the issues that some people have with the masons (which is the whole purpose of the website in the first place).  I even posted in the correct place.

You keep bringing up the Orange lodge and then saying it isn’t related to the discussion. OK, let’s drop that.

I can only speak to my own Masonic experiences. If others are still swearing oaths with the ancient penalties, that’s still not an issue as they have never been carried out. I agree, let’s drop that. And yes, I can handle it. Your perception of historical references and the commitment to a man’s honor as exemplified in the ancient penalties is something you may not understand because you don’t have the context of the entire Ritual. So yes, in that way, I and all the Masons who have that perspective are “something special”. We have been through the lessons of the degrees and have a better understanding of them than those who have not. It is our Obligation that makes us Masons and that is indeed, something special.

I never once accused you of being a conspiracy nut. I did say you keep bringing these “legitimate questions” up after they have been answered and backed up with reliable references that you have not bothered to take advantage of. It just gets tiresome answering the same old questions over and over to so many people who believe youtube is a reliable reference library. When somebody continues to belabor a point that has been addressed directly to them, it is beyond tiresome.

Your questions about “Inside the Brotherhood” have been answered repeatedly. Let’s drop that, too.

You are welcome to utilize this web site all you want. I, on the other hand, am under no obligation to repeatedly address the same question to the same person when it has already been answered.

Your premise that simply because a book is published that lies about Masonry means I have to address it is false. There are plenty of critical things published about Masonry that we choose to simply ignore as they are not worthy of the dignity of a response. The only reason your questions about “Inside the Brotherhood” were addressed at all here is because you asked. It seems our answers and references to more complete answers are not enough as you keep bringing it back into the discussion. Let’s drop that, too.

I don’t think there’s anything left that hasn’t been addressed. With that, I wish you well on your journey. Once again, I encourage you to take the next logical step and turn off your computer, find a lodge near you and bring your curiosity to a meeting with a real, live Mason.