Religion Catch All

[chris_ottawa]

@pat

Where are we in the discussion? I missed a couple days and it looks like I missed a lot.
One thing is for sure, if you start a religion thread, it’s going to get pounded like raw hamburger, it’s almost guaranteed!

I am just curious if we had any highlights that are worth reading. I don’t want to go through a 100 plus posts… I tried ,but damn…

I stopped following it 100+ posts ago, I missed a whole bunch and never caught up.

[pat]

Hey if you know about the Masons feel free to share. I know very little about them. I thought the Catholic church was forbidden in in Masonry. Hmm, how would you classify them? Or can you?

[mnben87]

@pat

Basically, we all operate, almost fully on faith. We believe the sun with rise (bare with me on the rhetoric, I know how the sun and earth move) tomorrow, but we cannot prove it. We believe our car will start, or that it will be there tomorrow, but we cannot prove it.

This is different than the way faith is used in a religious sense. Those examples are reasonable expectations based on repeatable patterns (chairs hold my weight every time, so I have faith that this chair will hold me). Faith in a religious sense does not have that.

In regards to solipsism, it is correct to say that one can’t prove the existence of others to themselves. We could be 5,10,10000 layers deep in the matrix, I could be one out of an infinite amount of simulations. All these things have something in common. There is no evidence.

Do you believe in the Yeti? I am guessing no. Are you using faith when you dismiss the existence of the Yeti? I am guessing no. You don’t believe it, because there isn’t evidence for it. Same with solipsism. Both are possible, but I think it is reasonable to dismiss things like this as they are just one out of an infinite amount of things that are possible.

[zecarlo]

@Aragorn

What I’m getting at is that you’re willing to accept different standards depending on whether you like the conclusion or not.

There is evidence that we all have minds, mind being a function of the brain, and no evidence god exists.

[chris_ottawa]

@thefourthruffian

You could, but you would be wrong (in general).

Just for the sake of discussion,

Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, by Albert Pike

Page 448:
“…Masonry is identical with the Ancient Mysteries…”

Page 605:
“THE Occult Science of the Ancient Magi was concealed under the shadows of the Ancient
Mysteries: it was imperfectly revealed or rather disfigured by the Gnostics: it is guessed at
under the obscurities that cover the pretended crimes of the Templars; and it is found
enveloped in enigmas that seem impenetrable, in the Rites of the Highest Masonry.”

You can interpret that in different ways I suppose, but it’s not a stretch to say that Freemasonry is an organization centered around occult beliefs.

What degree are you, if you don’t mind me asking?

[chris_ottawa]

@pat

I thought the Catholic church was forbidden in in Masonry.

It’s the other way around, Masonry is forbidden by the Catholic church.

@pat

Hey if you know about the Masons feel free to share.

Based on his name I would have to assume he must be a mason, referring to the three ruffians who killed Hiram Abiff.

[H_factor]

@treco

The avowed disbelief of God is not due to logic, it is due to not wanting to submit to him.

I would say this isn’t true often. I would have no problem submitting to God if I was convinced he existed and I knew what he/she/the wanted me to do. I’ll submit to someone who walks up to me right now with a gun drawn. I’m holding a computer and pen. That’s something real I can see someone has more power than me and I can ask them/be told what they want to do. Zero doubt most agnostics atheists would do the same.

But asking me to submit to something I’m not even sure is real? And if I establish it is how the fuck do I know what submitting means? Which book is correct and how do I know? Once I have the right book which part is correct when so many view the exact words as having completely different meanings. Most of the time throughout this forum when a “problem” verse is pointed out the religious people say “well it doesn’t mean that.” Which is nice because people disagree with that. It seems like everyone is convinced they are unquestionable faith translator. I must have missed that class in bible school.

I can assure you many people who aren’t religious it’s not a laziness thing. It’s not like many believe in God but are too lazy to pray or something.

[zecarlo]

@mnben87

This is different than the way faith is used in a religious sense. Those examples are reasonable expectations based on repeatable patterns (chairs hold my weight every time, so I have faith that this chair will hold me).

We know the sun will rise, not believe it will rise, given certain conditions. With cars, it can vary from belief to hope, depending on the car.

And we can prove these things. Look out your window in the morning. Turn your car key.

[mnben87]

@zecarlo

And we can prove these things

That is the difference right there.

It does bug me a bit when the religious say that something like faith a chair will hold you up is the same thing as faith in a specific God. There is a huge difference in these things. Pretending they are the same is ludicrous.

[Aragorn]

@chris_ottawa

You could argue that it’s a pseudo-religion or cult of sorts

I mean, you could. I wouldn’t and it’s not a great argument lol.

@pat

Have you seen that the “New Atheist” trend has seemed to have died off? Or at least subdued greatly?
When I am talking about “New Atheist” I mean the shrill, insulting, nasty, mean, Dawkin’s style arrogance and hatred for anything religious. It seemed to be hot around the 2010 mark, but it seems at least this part of life has mellowed a bit.

I haven’t really, but I also don’t actively read that kind of material or news much any more so I wasn’t in the thick o things. I have noticees Dawkins in the news less over years.

My personal opinion is everything goes in cycles, like fashion. There were shrill crazy atheists before, there will be again. Just like crazy anti-vax fundies.

@pat

have read a lot of atheists kind of breaking away from the aggressive mentality and just being more live and let live. I think it’s mellowed, I am just curious if somebody else who has seen it in the past, sees it mellowing a bit too

You may be right, as I do see some of that, but I also read less on those things so I am exposed to less all around. as I said it goes in cycles so I am sure both ends of the spectrum will peak again.

[Aragorn]

@pat

I thought the Catholic church was forbidden in in Masonry

Nope! Not at all.

I’d classify them as a club with fourthruffian. There are elements that take it more seriously–particularly abroad where it is more esoteric. But stillost certainly not a cult of any kind.

[Aragorn]

@chris_ottawa

Albert Pike

I’d be careful parsing language form the 1800s into the modern meanings we are more commonly used to.

[chris_ottawa]

Have you read any of that book? It’s not a misinterpretation of old fashioned language. You can find it online.

Anyway, my earlier comment about the Masons was only to point out that most of the US founding fathers were definitely not atheists, not to start a discussion about Freemasonry.

[chris_ottawa]

Pike wrote some weird shit, read this and tell me what you think he might be talking about:

(Morals and Dogma… page 283-284)

Man descended from the elemental Forces or Titans [Elohim], who fed on the body of the Pantheistic Deity creating the Universe by self-sacrifice, commemorates in sacramental observance this mysterious passion; and while partaking of the raw flesh of the victim, seems to be invigorated by a fresh draught from the fountain of universal life, to receive a new pledge of regenerated existence. Death is the inseparable antecedent of life; the seed dies in order to produce the plant, and earth itself is rent asunder and dies at the birth of Dionusos. Hence the significancy of the phallus, or of its inoffensive substitute, the obelisk, rising as an emblem of resurrection by the tomb of buried Deity at Lerna or at Sais.

[Aragorn]

@chris_ottawa

Pike wrote some weird shit

This was on my mind also

[chris_ottawa]

These two parts in the same paragraph just doesn’t sound right:

while partaking of the raw flesh of the victim, seems to be invigorated by a fresh draught from the fountain of universal life,

Hence the significancy of the phallus

[thefourthruffian]

@pat

Hey if you know about the Masons feel free to share. I know very little about them. I thought the Catholic church was forbidden in in Masonry. Hmm, how would you classify them? Or can you?

Well, I became a Mason in Iraq. And I was Roman Catholic at the time.

There are some Bishops in Europe who don’t like members of their flock becoming Masons, but it has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the Masons in certain countries (looking at you, Italy) being deeply involved in organized crime.

Masons certainly have no problem with Roman Catholics.

[thefourthruffian]

@chris_ottawa

What degree are you, if you don’t mind me asking?

Albert Pike one man and an asshole. He self-appointed himself as leader of the Masons, had a fair number of Scottish Rite people go along with him. But his scribblings are meaningless to me.

I am no number – that’s a misnomer. There are no “ranks” in Masonry, except Master Mason.

The Scottish Rite has a ceremony (like a play, I understand) where you become a supposedly 32 degree Mason, and if you give some cash you can get an honorary 33, but their “degrees” are meaningless.

That said, I don’t really know much about Scottish Rite and Pike. I was a York Rite Mason.

As far as being the “anti-Catholic”, I’ll have to ask at the next fish fry the York Rite and the Knights of Columbus put on together. I think this year’s got canceled by Covid.

[thefourthruffian]

@chris_ottawa

These two parts in the same paragraph just doesn’t sound right:

while partaking of the raw flesh of the victim, seems to be invigorated by a fresh draught from the fountain of universal life,

Hence the significancy of the phallus

Again, Pike is just a guy who wrote a book, claiming to have authority. Apparently put on a good show.

But he spoke for no one but himself.

[chris_ottawa]

@thefourthruffian

As far as being the “anti-Catholic”, I’ll have to ask at the next fish fry the York Rite and the Knights of Columbus put on together. I think this year’s got canceled by Covid.

I don’t know all the details of this but I also heard that in the US for some reason the Catholic church is not opposed to Freemasonry as they are elsewhere.

Since the decree “In Eminenti” of Pope Clement XII in 1738, Catholics have been forbidden to join the Masons, and until 1983, under pain of excommunication. Scanning official documents, the Church has condemned Freemasonry and other secret societies at least 53 times since 1738, and has specifically repeated the condemnation of Freemasonry 21 times.

On Nov. 26, 1983, with the approval of Pope John Paul II, the Sacred Congregation reiterated the ban on Catholics joining the Masons: “The Church’s negative position on Masonic association … remains unaltered, since their principles have always been regarded as irreconcilable with the Church’s doctrine. Hence, joining them remains prohibited by the Church. Catholics enrolled in Masonic associations are involved in serious sin and may not approach Holy Communion.”

Are Catholics Allowed to be Masons?.