Replies

I see that you have quoted Albert Pike. What you may not appreciate is that Albert Pike was speaking for himself — as all Freemasons do. So when he wrote: > “The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god... Lucifer, the Light Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light...Doubt it not!”

Do you deny that Albert Pike's book is the basic text of (at least) American Freemasonry? You know that it is. Why not simply admit that Freemasonry has a special place in its institutional heart for Lucifer?

I’m a Christian and a Freemason. How do you reconcile that dichotomy?

I have no idea. The two flatly contradict each other. One is all about the worship of the Father in Christ, the other is profoundly Luciferian and anti-Christ.

How do you reconcile the two?

> Do you deny that Albert Pike’s book is the basic text of (at least) American Freemasonry?

Yes, to the best of my knowledge Albert Pike, like all other masons, was entitled to his opinion, and that his writings are read with a degree of interest by a few American masons, but no his writings are not considered *the* basic text of American Freemasonry.

The “basic text of Freemasonry” is, in most Lodges where Christianity is practised, the Holy Bible (OT and NT). It has always been so, long before Albert Pike’s time.

For the avoidance of doubt I have copied a few of my American brethren into this message, in case I have made an error with the statements above. Naturally, if I have they will correct me.

> You know that it is.

Actually, I know that it isn’t, and I have just written for confirmation of same. Unless, of course, it is your intention to call me a Liar...

> Why not simply admit that Freemasonry has a special place in its institutional heart for Lucifer?

Ummmm... because it just isn’t so? Too easy an answer for you?

> I have no idea. The two flatly contradict each other. One is all about the worship of the Father in Christ, the other is profoundly Luciferian and anti-Christ.

Hogwash. I’m sorry if that sounds disrespectful, but what a load of nonsense. Truly.

> How do you reconcile the two?

Easy. The two practises are quite compatible.

And isn’t the word from which “devil” is translated “diabolos”? And does that word not mean “slanderer or false-accuser”?

Have you not considered the possibility that by making these wild accusations against your fellow Christians YOU may well be acting as a “slanderer or false-accuser”?

(I suggest that this distinct possibility may indeed be the case)

If that is true, then how do you reconcile doing the Devil’s work for Him?