Thursday, August 16, 2007

Behold a Dead Horse

I knew I should have kept my Masonic nose clean, gotten myself some of those higher degrees, and patiently abided my time until our Illuminati masters from Beta Reticuli tapped me for the secret cabal within the cabal.

By now, I'd be partying in the super-secret subterranean base at the Denver airport and getting free travel across the globe and into outer space in the fraternity's ultra-secret UFOs.

The flying saucer fleet exists. Free rides are available on demand for high-level Freemasons.

I know it's true. I read it on the Internet.

Shhh! Don't tell anyone. It's a secret.

| | | | |


  1. Crazy thing is people believe it too.


  2. "They resemble far out images from the Egyptian Skull headdress shapes to the modern-day "Martian" from the 50's sci-fi- movies".

    Well, yes... and the Simpsons, too! Wait, and Marge's BLUE hair-do... isn't blue the colour of Freemasonry? And wasn't Homer once member of a secret society?

    Br:. Ludwig

  3. I'll agree the ufo stuff is a little.. extreme.

    But in this book, the section on Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars is just amazing, and I have little doubt of it's validity. (then again, I do own a copy of this book.. whatever that's worth).

  4. Nonsense! Everyone knows that Tom Cruise and the Scienctologist's have a corner on the UFO market!!

  5. Lets see masons have a corner on Politics, Law enforcement, Judges, Lawyers, and many others. Boy I wonder why they would be so high on Judges, Lawyers, and Police? Maybe because one of the oaths is to protect a brother no matter what he's done. Yeah were all just jumping the gun on this one.


  6. Know what cracks me up? We Illuminati types won't allow the secrets of anti-gravity to the public 'cos we're gettin' rich on oil, right?

    So, why the hell wouldn't we get rich on anti-gravity, since we already control the technology? We'd be building the factories and selling the equipment, or getting rich on licensing. What the hell is this damn tie-in to oil that they keep talking about?

    You know, back in the late 80ss and early 90s, the konspiracy stuff was big. Talk show hosts, late night AM radio, webzines all talked aobut how Bush I was related to Clinton, and how FEMA was building concentration camps, and how UFO technology was being suppressed. Then it all dried up. What happened?

  7. Maybe because one of the oaths is to protect a brother no matter what he's done.

    More of that intellectual honesty at work, eh, Jean? Obviously you've done your research, because every website that has a Masonic ritual "expose" has exactly those words, don't they?

    Do you actually read the articles, or just look at the pictures and make up your own stories?

  8. Bro. Tom wrote:

    You know, back in the late 80s and early 90s, the konspiracy stuff was big. Talk show hosts, late night AM radio, webzines all talked aobut how Bush I was related to Clinton, and how FEMA was building concentration camps, and how UFO technology was being suppressed. Then it all dried up. What happened?

    Saturation, culminating in The X-Files, happened. Conspiracy theories became cool, went from sub-culture to pop culture, and like all trends, eventually fizzled in the public's eye, replaced by boy bands, games shows and finally reality TV.

    Everyone who wanted to know about conspiracy stuff knew about it, bought the merchandise, and then most moved on. Only the people who for personal reasons of their own held onto the old stories about black helicopters, alien greys, and chupacabras.

    What else happened? Technology. Spy gadgets. Security cameras. Cell phones. 9/11. The Patriot Act. Blogs and search engines recording your momentary thoughts for all eternity. Big Brother and the New World Order became real.

    So now the paranoids among us rail against the "coming New World Order" and keep blaming Jewish bankers, Freemasons and little green men, while the rest of us just find ways to live in our 21st century madness without worrying too much about it.

    — W.S.

  9. No Tom I just read your stupid comments and realize a. you are a complete tool and b. you play with dolls. And c. the only reason you come to this blog is because yours

    And most of the people in congress that support spy cams, Jewish bankers, and the types are freemasons.


  10. "What did Manly Hall say, even before becoming a Mason Tom, was the heart of Freemasonry? Verbatim if you don't mind. Show us your intellectual honesty in answering this Tom."

    Did you come close to even trying to see what he said? No. Instead, you lift from an apologetic site, perhaps and show no intellectual inquiry. Then you do the same with Fort Newton and his book without looking at what he actually said in the book. And as I said, these are among the best-known authors in the field.

    I daresay I expect the same intellectual dishonesty when you get around to choosing from the same apologetic websites your preferred information on Mackey, Pike and Coil.

    Now, let's see what other Masons have said about Manly Hall's book:

    From Unsolicited book review

    "Manly P. Hall (33rd degree Mason & founder of The Philosophical Research Society) gives us an illuminating, poetically written treatise on the origins of Ancient Masonry and the underlying, meaning of much Masonic Symbolism and practice. Hall's book is a poetic read, that can be consumed in one sitting, yet will be read and refered to many times again. He details some of the spiritual aspects of the hidden meanings of Masonry and the ancient origins from which the modern fraternity receives it's wisdom. The Foreward is by Reynold E. Blight, 33rd degree, K.T. & the illustrations are by J. Augustus Knapp, 32nd degree.... Obviously, this man is viewed as a Great, within the ranks of the Fraternity." book review:

    "If you're a Master Mason, you should have read or be reading this book. If you're a new Mason but not a Master yet, you should read this book. It discusses the symbolism of the degrees and a bit of the meaning of each stage of becoming a Master Mason. It puts Freemasonry and the degrees in a light you probably won't get otherwise but every Master Mason should experience. The more you read, the more Masonry will mean to you and the more you'll understand about Masonry."


    "Editorial Reviews . . . From the Back Cover

    Temple Builder, Craftsmen and Artisans alike, will find much for study and consideration within these pages. Here are keys which, if only read, will leave the reader still in ignorance but, if lived, will change the speculative Masonry of today into the operative Masonry of tomorrow, when each builder, realizing his own place, will see things which he never saw before, not because they were not there, but because he was blind. And there are none so blind as those who will not see."

    Now, Tom or Widows son: here are other questions for you which no other Mason has been able to answer:

    Where in his later writings did he reject what he'd written in Lost Keys?

    What motivated him to do his original research for Lost Keys?

    Who were his mentors?

    How are we to know when he joined the organization?

    Why would he want to join an organization with such beliefs - according to him - unless he wanted to verify his earlier knowledge regarding the secret doctrines and perhaps experience such "seething energies" he believes are available to Masons?

    Why was he considered noble enough to join if he held views that were blatantly untrue?

    Bill, bottom line: you cannot have it both ways.

    (And I will be waiting to see your diligence in finding out what in his mind were "the lost keys" of the 33rd degree.)

    Bill, it would seem as though the "personal theories of a non-Mason", as you call them, referring to Hall, might have a little more Masonic substance to them than you have indicated. Granted, it was well before Hall became a Mason that he wrote 'Lost Keys'. If memory serves me correctly, he also wrote 'The Secret Teachings Of All Ages' before becoming a Mason, presenting a special edition of it to the Scottish Rite Bodies in the Oakland, Calif. area before it was published for public consumption. So, what we have here is a man who wrote of Freemasonry, before he ever became a Mason. The first thought that would come to my mind is: "Was he accepted into Freemasonry in part because of his writings, or in spite of them?" I think we can refer to a couple of things to help clear up the matter of what is thought of him and his writings by the Craft in general.

    In the first place, I think it is well worth considering that the fact of the matter is that his writings appear on recommended reading lists that are furnished by several Grand Lodges. Then, we might want to give some thought to what is said about 'Lost Keys' in the catalog of the Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Co., which can hardly be considered as being an "anti-Masons" organization:
    "A book for the Mason and non-Mason. As a contribution to Masonic idealism, revealing the profounder aspects of an ancient fraternity which has always wrought for the benefit of mankind, the book is one to read over and over again."

    Further, we might want to consider what was written about Manly P. Hall in the obituary published in the 'Scottish Rite Journal', 11/90:
    "Illustrious Manly Palmer Hall, often called 'Masonry's Greatest Philosopher', departed his earthly labors peacefully in his sleep on August 7, 1990, in Los Angeles, California. . . .The author of over 50 books and more than 65 smaller works, Illustrious Hall was also the founder and a past President of the Philosophical Research Society of Los Angeles, California. He is best know for writing 'The Lost Keys of Freemasonry' (1923), 'The Dionysian Artificers' 1926, 'Masonic Orders of Fraternity' (1950) and, of course, his monumental 'Encyclopedic Outline' of Masonic history, philosophy and related subjects. . . .Like Grand Commander Albert Pike before him, Ill(ustrious) Hall did not teach a new doctrine but was an ambassador of an ageless tradition of wisdom that enriches us to this day.. ."

    Maybe Hall and his writings aren't quite as insignificant and unrelated to Freemasonry as some would have us believe??

    And lets not forget this little gem. “When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onwards and upwards he must prove his ability to properly apply (this) energy.”
    Manley P Hall [33rd degree Mason] ‘Lost Keys of Freemasonry’ 48,


  11. W.S.

    It makes me wonder how you have so much time finding these obscure webpages...

    I enjoyed your thoughtful insights better.


  12. Conspiracy theories became cool, went from sub-culture to pop culture, and like all trends, eventually fizzled in the public's eye, replaced by boy bands, games shows and finally reality TV.

    This smacks of a mass mind-control konspiracy if you ask me.

  13. Manly P Hall's writings should be read by every mason.
    same with Albert Pike.
    Then the mason may come to a better understanding of that which is lost. lost from the tinkering of christian men who worked their way into leadership positions within the fraternity.
    So the masonry of today is judeo-christian based, but according to Hall and Pike, ancient masonry taught something else.

    We should resurrect the works of these great philosophers.

    The knowledge they allude to predate organized religions and have stood the test of time and science, where reigious fall under the scrunity of logic, reason and science.......
    so mote it be, biatch

  14. First of all, Jean, thank you for taking the time to write a decent post, instead of simply flaming.

    What did Manly Hall say, even before becoming a Mason Tom,

    I don't know, Jean. I haven't read "Lost Keys", written well before he became a Mason. Likewise, I've only read a smattering of Pike and a bit of Mackey and just a few bits and pieces of the various other "Masonic" authors.

    Let me explain about that.

    As much as I love reading about the esoteric, I do have a day job which keeps me fairly busy. I'm able to write small bits during the day. For example, it took over an hour and three interruptions (for work) to get this far.

    And Masonry, while taking up a significant portion of my time, is not my entire life. Or a better way to put it would be that, while living the principles of Masonry (truth, charity, self-improvement) is my life, the fact is that a few years after I became a member, I devoted very little time to what other Masonic authors had to say. Not that I don't find them interesting, but their experience is not my experience. Yes, there are often overlaps and commonalities, but Masonry is more about finding one's own path than about following some writings. After all, that's what religion is all about; following the teachings and interpretations peculiar to one's theology.

    Freemasonry as a whole does not have a "philosophy." There have been many very good writers who expound upon what they get out of the fraternity, or about what they believe the important truths of the craft are. Many of our brothers will agree with them. However, many don't, or agree with only some of it. More importantly, though, most have never read them! Why not? Because there's no requirement to do so; while Hall, Pike, Mackey, etc., are well-respected authors about the esoteric side of the fraternity, they are not canonical, in the sense that what they wrote, while being respected, is not accepted as being in any way definitive of Freemasonry.

    The most difficult thing to understand about the craft - probably because it seems too simple - is that there is no underlying philosophy, doctrine or dogma that the members agree on! That is, while members are encouraged to study for their own personal improvement, and while there have been some excellent writings in the past, and will likely be more in the future, not one of them is accepted as doctrinal.

    Yes, it seems unbelievable that the fraternity has survived for centuries without some kind of "mission statement," but it's my opinion (and since I'm a respected Masonic writer, it must be true) that it's the lack of a formal doctrine that has contributed to it's longevity. It's not the philosophy that makes Widow's Son and I brothers (nor could it - we disagree on many points about the craft), but the basic requirements of membership itself: being men of good character with a desire for self improvement.

    Again, this is the part where non-Masons get it wrong; that some men write about Freemasonry in terms usually seen reserved for religious discussion leads some people to assume that they do so because Freemasonry actually is a religion - albeit one in which the overwhelming majority of members don't seem to recognize it as such.

    More astoundingly, though, is that certain non-Masons take great pains to point out why they think it is a religion, despite the fact that virtually all Masons will take great pains to explain why they don't believe it is. The part that nobody seems to ask, though, is this: What kind of religion is it in which the members don't believe they are practicing? Furthermore, considering that most Masons in the US and UK practice some form of Christianity, what kind of religion is it in which the members believe that they belong to a different religion entirely? This is akin to visiting a synagogue or church and trying to tell the worshipers that what they are really practicing is Santeria.

  15. Kudos Brother Tom
    Tom Coste
    Halcyon 498

  16. V.W> Bro. Accousti:

    Couldn't ahve said it better myself.


  17. Not even you Tom can defend freemasonry. Your comments do show that you are a total TOOL. Masonry is a religion so stop all the lying because even you and your tool brothers have done nothing to prove it's not a religion.
    I showed that masonry has it's own salvation with the giving of the lambskin apron.
    So do not mote it be Biatch.


  18. Oh, Jean, and just when we were getting along so well, too.

    You haven't "proved" anything, Jean. That bit about the white apron has been mentioned by better trolls than you for the last century.

    Let me toss something out, just as food for thought.

    It's my observation that people who are members of fundamentalist sects in their general religion become very (perhaps "overly" is a better word) obsessed with the literal as opposed to the esoteric points of that religion. This, in itself, is not necessarily a bad thing. The problem, though, is that when trying to have a discussion with such literal-minded people, those with a more open-minded perspective find themselves unable to explain esoteric concepts because fundamentalists do not have the language, or rather, the syntax and argot with which to maintain agreement.

    To put it simply, despite the fact that you may both be using English, literalists and esotericists are speaking completely different languages.

    The lambskin thing is a good example. We use terms like "white symbolizes purity" not because there is anything inherently pure about the color, but because in our society there is a long association with white being "spotless", i.e., "clean" - a condition that we (again, by societal convention) associate with "goodness."

    Masonic ritual is full of symbolism; not merely the obvious things like the compasses and trowels, but also the verbiage and phrasing - it's meant to be a kind of word play that uses associative reasoning, albeit in a very subtle manner. The approach that the writers of this (and most of what you're seeing as ritual on the various expose websites was only written in the last 100 to 150 years) take is to use terms that are (or were) common in everyday life so that the listener could associate them with certain moral lessons. Sometimes the meaning isn't apparent at first, sometimes one discovers underlying meanings.

    But note that these meanings are important only to the person interpreting them. If you are reading these with a literal frame of mind, then you are going to associate certain things accordingly, while others will read deeper and/or completely different meanings.

    Finally, I should point out that you've accused me of "lying" several times now. My own perspective is that you do not understand esoteric interpretations, and instead of making an attempt to understand me, or Masonry, you simply dismiss it as either unimportant, or as a deliberate misleading.

    Fascinating, eh, what?

  19. Come Tom that's the best you can do. A half page of half truths. Stop the lying and stop the b.s. replies.
    That little clip of the lambskin apron is the proof in the pudding. And the very fact that you still can't tell the truth about masonry being a religion says much.
    Now that's Fascinating

  20. What's really amazing is how Tom and Widow's son dance and lie around everything.

    That's the best comments you can come up with. I have a problem with masons who say it's not a religion which we all know it is. I could care less what religion anyone person is. It's the fact that all you masons indeed lie when it comes to the religious, yes religious teachings masonry has.
    So lets do this again.

    Anonymous said...
    For a moment let's say Masonry IS a religion. Again, I ask you: So what?

    W.S. I have been through this with you in another on of your posts. Stop the lying about it not being a religion. When you and I both know that masonry is a religion. Stop lying to new canidates about the fact that it's not a religion.

    "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instructions in religion. ... This is the true religion revealed to the ancient patriarchs; which Masonry has taught for many centuries, and which it will continue to teach as long as time endures." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 213

    "(Masonry) is the universal, eternal, immutable religion, such as God planted it in the heart of universal humanity. ... The ministers of this religion are all Masons who comprehend it." Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma, pg. 219

    Albert Pike was nothing if not inconsistent, but he was real clear about the 'religion' of Masonry. It's restated even today, that Masonry is not "a religion" but "religion." You can't split that hair.
    Masonry teaches it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven.

    According to Freemasonry, it is the purity of life and rectitude of conduct that is the very essence of what is necessary for entering heaven.

    And you ask if there is a problem with this??

    I want to make sure I understand your contention.
    Does Masonry present a 'God'?
    These presentations are undeniable, as they are plainly stated in Ritual.

    Does Masonry possess a liturgy?
    The entire Ritual is liturgy.
    Rigid following of a structured form, required (proscribed) prayers, "acceptable" and "unacceptable" responses from candidates, and a catechism are but some examples of this liturgy.

    Does Masonry practice worship?
    Prayer is the most intimate form of worship --- conversation with God.
    Corporate prayer bonds a gathered body as one in this worship, in unified conversation with God.
    Masonry opens Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with invocation seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    Masonry demands prayer from its candidate at the outset of his travels through each Degree.
    Masonry directs men to prayer in its Ritual.
    Masonry prays over its dead.
    Masonry closes Lodge (and all other Masonic ceremonies) with benediction seeking "Divine Aid, Blessing, and Guidance".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never directs Mason to The One True Living God.)

    Does Masonry possess a doctrine?
    Masonry very plainly presents Masons with "the immortality of the soul, and the hope of the afterlife in heaven".
    From the first lesson of "the Common Gavel", to the "sheepskin lectures", Masonry presents to Masons a striving, by their own efforts, to become acceptable before God, and to be "welcomed home" with "Well done, good and faithful servant".
    (The problem arises in that Masonry never addresses man's sinful, condemned state, the need for salvation, or the Only Way [Jesus] to that glorious immortality in Heaven.)

    Does Masonry possess a priesthood, or clerics?
    Masonry must be taught and learned --- passed from those that "have light" to those that "seek light".
    Though not as prevalent these days (but on the resurgence from what I hear) is the assignment of Mentors, and the focus upon "Lodges of Instruction".
    Historically, Entered Apprentices were not "Passed", nor Fellowcrafts "Raised" to the next Degree until they had demonstrated credible knowledge of their current Degree in Freemasonry, by presenting a "work", either in Lectures or Papers, proving that they were "ready" for the next Degree.
    This is the oldest form of priesthoods and clerics known to man.

    These points, from the definition of religion, present a clear picture.
    Is Masonry a religion?
    Let the honest man answer.

    Sunday, August 19, 2007 11:06:00 AM

    Anonymous said...
    Lambskin Apron stuff.
    Main Entry: 1es·sen·tial
    Pronunciation: i-'sen(t)-sh&l
    Function: adjective
    1 : of, relating to, or constituting essence : INHERENT
    2 : of the utmost importance : BASIC, INDISPENSABLE, NECESSARY {essential foods} {an essential requirement for admission to college}
    3 : IDIOPATHIC {essential disease} {essential hypertension}
    - es·sen·tial·ly /-'sench-lE, -'sen-ch&-/ adverb
    - es·sen·tial·ness /-'sen-ch&l-n&s/ noun
    synonyms ESSENTIAL, FUNDAMENTAL, VITAL, CARDINAL mean so important as to be indispensable. ESSENTIAL implies belonging to the very nature of a thing and therefore being incapable of removal without destroying the thing itself or its character {conflict is essential in drama}. FUNDAMENTAL applies to something that is a foundation without which an entire system or complex whole would collapse {fundamental principles of algebra}. VITAL suggests something that is necessary to a thing's continued existence or operation {cut off from vital supplies}. CARDINAL suggests something on which an outcome turns or depends {a cardinal rule in buying a home}.

    Main Entry: 1nec·es·sary
    Pronunciation: 'ne-s&-"ser-E
    Function: adjective
    Etymology: Middle English necessarie, from Latin necessarius, from necesse necessary, probably from ne- not + cedere to withdraw -- more at NO
    1 a : of an inevitable nature : INESCAPABLE b (1) : logically unavoidable (2) : that cannot be denied without contradiction c : determined or produced by the previous condition of things d : COMPULSORY
    2 : absolutely needed : REQUIRED

    No semantics... just plain English.
    "essentially necessary" means exactly that.

    Now, to the passage from Ritual we have in question:
    What does it matter if you see "living in Christ" or you see "living by the golden rule" ??? Not one bit...right?
    The only thing that matters is what that Ritual Passage says in plain English.
    If some fellow says "Living in Christ", he gets proven wrong immediately by the facts that this same address is given to ALL Masons, Christian & Anti-Christian.
    The "golden rule" fellow is dead-wrong of the bat, because "golden rule" IS NOT how to get to heaven, is it?

    That passage very inescapably says:
    1. "Here is the Masons' presentation of Heaven,
    2. Purity of life and conduct is essentially necessary to get into this heaven,
    3. And here is a Lambskin Apron to remind you of this essentially necessary ticket to heaven."
    How to Get There
    The Reminder

    That is as plain as it gets, and W.S. and Tom, I outright DEFY you to make it say anything else than what it DOES say.

    Since you can NOT change what it DOES say, then you are flat stuck with "Purity of life and conduct is the way to heaven", and you are flat stuck YOU HAVE A LIE STARING YOU DEAD IN THE FACE, STRAIGHT OUT OF MASONIC RITUAL.

    Stop LYING.


  21. I think one of the coolest things about lodge is how people from diverse religions and cultures come together to talk about morals, character, and community--and declare themselves brothers. In the lodge I belong to here in Chicago, I've personally assisted a Wiccan, a Catholic, a black south African school teacher, Filipinoes, Hispanics, Caucasions, raging liberal deists, raging republican flag worshipers, and a medieval weapons specialist. We don't fight about religion, we don't fight about politics. We have a nice dinner together, talk a little too much about the implications of Family Guy on a primarily Simpsonic media culture, swap bad jokes and over-volunteer ourselves. I'm constantly impressed by the way this system works in bringing together seemingly disparate factions of our broader culture into meetings that don't dissolve into screamfests or fistfights.

    However, I'm a little pissed about the UFO thing. Brotherhood be damned--get me to London for lunch for free, man!

  22. Bro. Chris, that sounds exactly like Friendship Lodge.
    Especially the "overvolunteering" bit.

  23. The only part that sounds like my lodge is the "raging Republican flag worshipers."

    — W.S.

  24. 1. Bro:. Tom, hats off!

    2. "Jean", just for your record: I am a Mason and couldn't care less about what Pike, Hall, and all the other people you cite time and again in the vain attempt to "prove" your preconceptions have written, and in fact most of my brothers haven't even heard their names. The only thing you prove is that you have absolutely no clue about Masonry.

    is not a religion
    is not a religion
    is not a religion.

    You write: "Does Masonry present a 'God'? Yes. [...] Does Masonry possess a liturgy? Yes. [...] Does Masonry practice worship? Yes." You insinuate that by these criteria Freemasonry qualifies as a discrete religion. You have to agree that by the logic of your argument different Christian denominations, such as Catholicism, Calvinism, Lutheranism, would qualify as discrete religions as well (and I wouldn't be too surprised if you were enough of a fanatic to believe this -- I just want you to know that most Christians, while belonging to a certain denomination, would never dare exclude their sisters and brothers from Christianity just because they worship in different ways). And if you tell a member of a religious brotherhood in, say, southern Italy (like those centuries-old groups organizing and sponsoring processions) that he or she through this very membership belongs to some other religion than the Roman Catholic church, you will get yourself into deep trouble.

    You write: "Does Masonry possess a doctrine? Yes." And then you present the hope for an afterlife as a doctrine (how can something as personal as hope be a doctrine? Can you actually stipulate that somebody should hope for something?) How does this "doctrine" make Freemasonry different from any other group characterized by a certain degree of spirituality that even you wouldn't declare a discrete religion, e.g. the Salvation Army? You write: "The problem arises in that Masonry never addresses man's sinful, condemned state, the need for salvation, or the Only Way [Jesus] to that glorious immortality in Heaven." Bro:. Tom was quite right about you "literal-minded" people: If you cannot see the symbolism of faultiness in speaking about a "rough ashlar", I can't help you. And you have a problem with Masons "striving, by their own efforts, to become acceptable before God", by which you mean striving for self-improvement, as it is taught in my lodge at least, and which is a *very* different cup of tea. But I dare tell you right in the face that your own main reason for this whole aggressive Mason-bashing you go in for is not for the sake of self-improvement but to "become more acceptable before God". Your aggressive and (by accusing everyone not sharing your views of dishonesty) insulting manner, and immunity to every argument that might expose your point of view as prejudiced, do not prove any exceptional love of God, as you might hope, but rather your haughtiness, your self-righteousness, your hybris in putting yourself above the conscience of many good men and in the end (sinfully in your own set of beliefs) above God's own judgment, and reveal an overall narcissistic personality. You do not love God, you love yourself, you are so much convinced of your own righteousness as a Pharisee. Please let God judge, I trust in his justness, not in yours.

    And, please, STOP UPPER-CASE-YELLING. It doesn't make your argument more sophisticated.

    Bro:. Ludwig


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.