Origins of Masonry?

[CajunTinMan]

You are claiming my religion is false, then?

Brother Maloney. I don't know what your religion is but mine is based on Jesus Chirst the Son of God. It would not matter who his first followers were or who the first Christian Sects were. My relationship is with him. I don't believe Brother Potter in any way meant to call your religion false. He was only stating history as he knows it. Just as you were doing with the history of Masonry. Regardless who the first Sects were it does not change who Christ is.

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

You are claiming my religion is false, then?

No, I am claiming that your statement about the so called heresies holding the historical position of less antiquity than literalist Christianity is false. I am providing the oldest known "Christian" writings would be deemed Gnostic by today's standards.

I would never stand in a man's way as to how he chose to worship be it Christian, Jew, Muslim, etc. I just love the study of comparative religion and was disputing your statement.

1st Thessalonians is likely, by analysis of writing, one of the oldest, if not the oldest....but you have to believe the analysis.

By age of the actual document alone then the so called "Gnostic" text would win.

The oldest known codex such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus would not win the "age" of document argument.

 

[Brother JC]

Regardless who the first Sects were it does not change who Christ is.

Indeed. There are over 3,000 sects of Christianity in existence today, but they are all Christians.

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

I would go so far as to say that what or who or how Christ is...is unique to each individual and this esoteric love of Christ is so personal and ineffable is as unique as those who love him.

 

[BryanMaloney]

Regardless who the first Sects were it does not change who Christ is.

Actually, it does. The Gnostics teach that Christ is not fully human--He is God in their eyes but not completely human.

 

[CajunTinMan]

But does that change who he is?

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

Well this is a can of worms...but I'll talk Christ for minute.

It may or may not change for a man what or who Christ is and what Christ means for him and I think all potentials are okay.

Faith is a very personal matter. For some faith needs to be unshakable to be pure. Therefore, changing your mind or interpretation of Christ seems unthinkable and for them, it is likely that the path should be rigid and straight. A definable Christ as the Son of God as preached from the pulpit of their church is the best Christ for them. It will bring the most peace and serve a valuable purpose in that man's life.

For some, the journey is the goal. Christ might be a prophet or still remain the Son of God, but either way he serves as the perfect exemplar of human potential. For these folks Christ grows with them and in them to some degree. They question everything and accept nothing at face value and for them Christ shares a journey wherein there may never be a fully realized definition of Christ as he grows and changes with their perceptual understandings of their faith as they find it.

For some Christ is not historical, but allegorical. The Christos is simply the divine potential that is all humanity. Much more like a holy ghost figure than a Jewish guy who was also God on earth. More ethereal and by zero means material.

The real obstacles is being comfortable enough in your faith that you don't need to beat your chest and tell everyone else how theirs is wrong.

 

[BryanMaloney]

And once again, is this Gnosticism actual Masonic doctrine? You never answered that question with a simple "Yes" or "No".

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

I am not sure what "Masonic" doctrine is....canonical Masonry

Yes, you can find Gnosticism in the teachings of Masonry. Just as you can find Christian, Islamic and Jewish teachings in Masonry.

The speculative Masonry of the 17th and 18th century was certainly an organization that attracted many natural philosophers whose Christian philosophies would have been considered Gnostic and the third degree of Masonry is predominately Gnostic in its overtones.

Albert Pike wrote the famous "G" lecture and he was arguably a Gnostic.

 

[BryanMaloney]

Yes or No, must a Mason embrace Gnosticism to fully be a Mason?

You're as forthright as a Chicago politician.

 

[BryanMaloney]

What, no lengthy answer? It's a very straightforward question. Give it a shot.

Yes or No, must a Mason embrace Gnosticism to fully be a Mason?

 

[CajunTinMan]

No. I will not and I am a Mason. So i guess the answer is no.

 

[Brother JC]

I'm not sure you have to "embrace" something for it to exist in the structure of a system. To say that there are gnostic elements within our Ritual does not mean you have to choose the red pill or the blue pill, it means the Brothers before us delved into other levels of theology and theosophy.

I do not have to be a Gnostic to be a Freemason, but that does not change the fact that there are elements of that sect's teachings within Freemasonry.

 

[CajunTinMan]

I agree with that statement. I guess my point was that Masonry is something different to each person. You take away form it what you want. It is a blend of different theologies. My other point is that regardless if it partially Gnostic in nature it does not interfere my Faith because Masonry is not a religion.

 

[Frater Cliff Porter]

Bryan you seem tense Brother.... I don't think life has a whole lot of yes and no's. Absolutes rarely have value.

That being said I don't even know what the "fully a Mason" a Mason is. That sounds a lot like "real Christian" or "real Gnostic".

I guess my answer is...I refuse to answer based on the fact that I am not fully a Mason....I am just partially a Mason. I am a dad, a Christian, a cop, a speaker, a writer, and sometimes in the shower a singer. So I have too many things going on in my life to make me fully a Mason .

 

[BryanMaloney]

In other words, when the rubber meets the road, dance a little sidestep...

 

[Brother JC]

Brother Bryan, considering the fact that you have ignored every attempt at discussion (on a "discussion" forum) in favor of attempting to bait Frater Cliff, I'd wager you aren't really looking for his answer.
Whether you are trying to make him mad, embarrass him, or just be a thorn in his side, I doubt a trained homicide detective is going to rise to the occasion.
Others have answered your question. Perhaps it's time to discuss their views, or move forward, on the level, to the next subject.

 

[BryanMaloney]

I am looking for a direct, straightforward answer. Gnosticism seems to be promulgated as some mandatory Masonic path by some posters. Is it, or is it just a sideline? It's been flatly stated that Gnosticism is the earliest form of Christianity. Does that mean that non-Gnostic Christians aren't following Christianity as believed by the Apostles? That would have to be the conclusion, if Gnosticism is the earliest form. Gee, I guess that means that all the Evangelicals are wrong, too...

 

[CajunTinMan]

I see this same argument from the profane when it comes to Albert Pike. Brother Porter has shared with us information that he has gained from his research. He has spoken of his views (as well as the views of others) on Masonry. He is neither in a position, nor has the authority to speak for all of Masonry. No one does. But he has shared his thoughts. I don’t agree with a lot of his thoughts but I respect them. There is evidence that the early Christians were Gnostic. You can find that research just about anywhere. Does that mean that they were? No. It just means that there is some research that points that direction. I think it would be hard for Bother Porter to give you the definitive answer that you require because he can only speak with authority for what he believes. Peace and harmony Brothers

 

[Brother JC]

Brother Bryan,

With 3,000 sects of Christianity all saying they are right, you really can't use an apostolic argument. The Apostles never used the phrase "Christianity,"

CTM is having to reiterate what we've all said; no, you don't have to be Gnostic to be a Freemason, or a Christian, though both require tolerance and understanding. Several of the Apostles you are bandying about are, to this day, known as Gnostics. They were as much a part of the formation of the Church as any other.

If someone says you must be a Gnostic to understand Freemasonry, I will disagree with them emphatically. If they say that reading the Gnostic Gospels may be of interest to me, and a valuable learning experience, I will probably trust in my Brethren, and at least give it a tolerant chance.