If anyone has already started reading this blog, I know it's been awhile since I have updated, but I'm working on some research projects right now, which I will post about as soon as they are ready.
Here's a few:
1. The Book of Abraham Facsimile 1 and ancient astrology cults
2. Hermetic philosophy and 2 Nephi in the Book of Mormon
3. Scottish Rite 4th degree and the role of secrecy in the mystery religions
I'm working on a lot right now for the Guthrie and Master Craftsman programs so it may take a week or two, but I'm planning to have some interesting posts up in the near future.
Monday, July 5, 2010
Monday, April 19, 2010
Religion and the Problem of Evil
I'm in the middle of developing a new blog entry, but in the mean time I thought I'd post my third master craftsman paper, which pertains to the Rose Croix degrees of the Scottish Rite. The topic is on Albert Pike's view of religion and the problem of evil.
The most interesting thing I learned while doing the reading assignment for this quiz was Albert Pike’s views on religion that are expressed in the book A Bridge to Light by Rex R. Hutchens. We learn that we must be tolerant of all religious views, even when they are different from our own. We also learn that many religions shared views on God and the problem of evil. Albert Pike believed that all creeds held that God’s identity is “immutable and permanent” and that God is “great, good, and wise.” (Page 131 in A Bridge to Light) Since these traits are common to all religions, members of these faiths can stand side-by-side, in Scottish Rite Masonry, worshipping the same God with these common characteristics.
Even the concept of a Messiah is a universal one, and many religions are awaiting the coming of a Messiah-type figure. Therefore, it is not appropriate for a Christian to not be tolerant of another’s religious views. Also, if Jesus Christ is God, then the other religions that are worshipping God are ultimately acknowledging Him anyway, even if expressing their belief of Him using different characteristics. The same universal truths have been expressed differently, appropriately to those who perceive them. Religion follows the same format with God sharing common characteristics. This brings to mind a quote from the Mormon scripture Doctrine and Covenants, “All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself.” (D&C 93:30) We must be tolerant since people have the truth that is appropriate for them.
The problem of evil is also something addressed by Albert Pike, and is an issue that all religions have addressed. That good will eventually triumph over evil is a common trend throughout most religions. The existence of an all-powerful God almost begs the idea that evil must be part of His plan, since nothing can exist unless He allows it. Therefore, many believe that evil is God’s way of testing us. The evil in the world gives us a chance to show our virtues, a chance to improve, and a chance to learn survival of adversity. This is the way God gives us “trial by fire” so that we ultimately come out of the experience better people. This idea hints at the royal secret, or equilibrium, that good and evil are kept in a constant balance.
The most interesting thing I learned while doing the reading assignment for this quiz was Albert Pike’s views on religion that are expressed in the book A Bridge to Light by Rex R. Hutchens. We learn that we must be tolerant of all religious views, even when they are different from our own. We also learn that many religions shared views on God and the problem of evil. Albert Pike believed that all creeds held that God’s identity is “immutable and permanent” and that God is “great, good, and wise.” (Page 131 in A Bridge to Light) Since these traits are common to all religions, members of these faiths can stand side-by-side, in Scottish Rite Masonry, worshipping the same God with these common characteristics.
Even the concept of a Messiah is a universal one, and many religions are awaiting the coming of a Messiah-type figure. Therefore, it is not appropriate for a Christian to not be tolerant of another’s religious views. Also, if Jesus Christ is God, then the other religions that are worshipping God are ultimately acknowledging Him anyway, even if expressing their belief of Him using different characteristics. The same universal truths have been expressed differently, appropriately to those who perceive them. Religion follows the same format with God sharing common characteristics. This brings to mind a quote from the Mormon scripture Doctrine and Covenants, “All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself.” (D&C 93:30) We must be tolerant since people have the truth that is appropriate for them.
The problem of evil is also something addressed by Albert Pike, and is an issue that all religions have addressed. That good will eventually triumph over evil is a common trend throughout most religions. The existence of an all-powerful God almost begs the idea that evil must be part of His plan, since nothing can exist unless He allows it. Therefore, many believe that evil is God’s way of testing us. The evil in the world gives us a chance to show our virtues, a chance to improve, and a chance to learn survival of adversity. This is the way God gives us “trial by fire” so that we ultimately come out of the experience better people. This idea hints at the royal secret, or equilibrium, that good and evil are kept in a constant balance.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Kabbalistic Tree of Life and Masonic Traits
I thought I would post my second paper for the Master Craftsman I course for the Scottish Rite, just to give an idea of the types of things you learn in this course. If you are a mason and you have not yet signed up for this I highly recommend it. It really gives you a lot of knowledge that you normally would not get in one course. So, anyway, its a pretty short essay, but here it is:
The most interesting thing I learned while studying for this quiz was the application of the Kabala to Scottish Rite Masonry. The tree of life, which can be thought of as ten emanations from God supported by three pillars, can also be thought of as a visual manifestation of the characteristics of God. In A Bridge to Light by Rex R. Hutchens, he mentions that Albert Pike applies the three pillars of freemasonry, which are wisdom, strength, and beauty, as being the pillars supporting the tree of life. Strength is the pillar on the left and corresponds to the pillar of severity. Wisdom is the pillar on the right and corresponds to the pillar of mercy. The middle pillar is beauty, and results when equilibrium is achieved between the left and right pillars. Man is in the emanation of the malkuth at the bottom of the pillar of beauty, receiving the nine emanations from God. Albert Pike equates the other nine sephiroth as the nine Masonic virtues, divided into two inverted triangles, with the top triangle being right-side-up. The bottom triangle is Independence, which results when truthfulness and endurance are in equilibrium. The middle triangle is equity, which results when justice and mercy are in equilibrium. The top triangle is attainment, which results when silence and devotion are in equilibrium. Silence, justice, and truthfulness correspond to the sephiroth on the strength, or severity pillar. Devotion, mercy, and endurance correspond to the sephiroth on the wisdom, or mercy pillar. Independence, equity, and attainment are on the middle pillar, or pillar of beauty, which results when equilibrium occurs. Beyond the top sephiroth is the Ainsoph, or inexpressible source of all things, the Deity from who all things emanate.
This is interesting because it expresses the teachings of Scottish Rite Masonry in a systematic way, showing how man can be perfected and develop the divine characteristics within himself. It also sets the foundation on which all of the Scottish Rite degrees are based. These degrees teach duties that develop these traits in the candidate.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Symbolism of the Sun in Masonry
I thought for tonight's blog I would address the accusation of many antis that masons are sun worshippers. After all, the sun is dominant throughout Freemasonry, including the rituals, on some aprons, and has even made its way to some company logos, movies, and even on some LDS temples. Movement in the masonic lodge is patterned after the sun's movements. Many conspiracy theorists claim this proves masonry worships Baal, a sun god mentioned in the Old Testament.
On the Tree of Life as shown in the picture, the center of the Tree of Life is known as "Tipareth" or "The Nail" and is said by Kabbalists to be symbolic of the sun, whose glyph is a point within a circle. Masonry makes use of the symbolism of the Kabbalah to teach moral lessons, but not necessarily for the purpose of worship. The middle pillar of the Kabbalah is an important concept in masonry. It represents equilibrium, when everything is in perfect balance. The concept of justice and mercy is fundamental here. A thorough study of 2 Nephi 2 in the Book of Mormon will illustrate this concept. There is no good without evil, there must be an opposition in all things. Also, God's justice must always be in perfect equilibrium with His mercy. We can illustrate this perfect balance astrologically by the sun at meridian height, which is in between its rising and setting.
To illustrate how such a fallacy as sun worship can happen, we can look at a quote from Albert Pike's Legenda II: the Enigma of the Sphinx. Pike says, "The symbols of the wise have in all ages become the idols of the vulgar." We see in Freemasonry that prayer is made to the Great Architect of the Universe, not to the sun. Some have tried to layer the Baal legend on masonry by saying it is believed that the spirit of Baal went to the sun when he died, and that the sunrise is Baal's birth and the sunset is his death. If some believe that, I think this perfectly illustrates what Albert Pike was trying to say here. Masonry is learning through symbols, not worship of symbols. Also, the concept of death and resurrection is found in many religions, including Christianity. Many masonic concepts are Judeo-Christian in origin, and only expressing a belief in a Supreme Being is required for membership. This hardly proves allegiance to a sun god. We need to be careful to recognize the difference between the "signifier" and the "signified."
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Review of Ray Comfort Antimormon Video
Well, I thought for my first critique of Protestant Antimormonism that I would review a video that has shown up on some apologetics sites where Protestant author Ray Comfort interviews a Mormon in an attempt to show that Mormons do not believe in what he terms "Biblical Christianity."
To see the video you can copy and paste this link: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121726
Sorry, for some reason they aren't letting me post activated links.
First of all, the man he interviews as representative of Mormonism only says he was "raised Mormon" and does not necessarily identify himself as active or inactive. Comfort goes on to ask the man a series of questions in an effort to determine whether or not he was "saved." Comfort's conclusion is that the man is a thief, adulterer, liar, blasphemer, etc. and is in trouble on judgment day. The man responds throughout the attack by saying that he regrets doing those things (which demonstrates repentance), that only God judges the heart, that Jesus took his sins upon Himself, he does his best and He (Jesus) does the rest, and quotes from James 2 that "Faith without works is dead."
Comfort counters the man by saying that if the believer has to do anything it is considered a payment and no longer grace, thus contradicting the Bible, that salvation cannot be earned. He uses Eph. 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved...not of works, lest any man should boast." He told the man that we show our repentance by our works or fruits. The man countered that we have to make ourselves deserving of God's love and trust. Comfort acted shocked at this and said it contradicted the Ephesians passage in the Bible and that his eternal salvation depends on having the correct view.
Now, before we cover the two Scriptures used in this encounter, I would like to point out that Comfort is employing a classic antimormon twist on semantics here. The term "salvation" means something different in Protestant and Mormon theologies. Mormonism takes the term "salvation" to refer to exaltation, or receiving the maximum amount of rewards in the next life for following God's plan of salvation, and that some who do not receive salvation will still be in one of the lower heavens, having receved less rewards for doing less works or being less valiant in the Gospel. This explains why Jesus Christ mentions that some will be greater in the Kingdom of Heaven, and why Paul says we are rewarded according to our works.
Protestant theology, on the other hand, teaches that salvation is being saved from hell. This theology allows for no middle ground, if you are saved you don't burn for eternity, if you are lost you are condemned to burn in the lake of fire for eternity. Therefore, Mormons who do not know this are naturally going to answer questions in the context of what they believe salvation is. This explains why the man in the video responded that he wasn't sure if he would receive salvation, but moments later said he would be moving "upward" when he died.
To sum it up, Mormonism teaches saved by grace, exalted by works. Protestantism teaches saved by grace, show evidence of being saved by works. Was Ray Comfort aware of this difference when he interviewed the man? I'm not sure, since this is a common misconception among protestants, who don't fully understand Mormon theology. In Mormonism, emphasis is placed on working toward exaltation, not showing evidence of initial conversion. I feel Ray Comfort is wrong in presenting Mormonism out of context, and claiming we are not Christians when we clearly depend on the Atonement of Christ and His death on the cross. The man in the video clearly demonstrated repentance and belief in Christ.
Now, let's take a look at the two Scriptures used in this video, and see if they were used in their proper contexts. James 2:26, "...faith without works is dead." To understand this passage we should look at the context in which James uses it. Earlier in chapter 2 James tells us about those that transgress the law of love given by Christ, that love is the fulfillment of the law. It answers in verse 13, "For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment." This is what sparks the discussion of the relationship of faith and works.
Verse 14 says, "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith and have not works? Can faith save him?" We are given an example of telling a hungry person to be warmed and filled without giving them something, which is like having faith without works. The chapter also uses the example of Abraham offering Isaac on the altar and Rahab the harlot sending the messengers out without divulging their location, which are acts that took great faith in God.
Verses 17 and 18 remind us, "Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." This verse shows us that works are very much apart of faith. You cannot have faith without works.
Verse 26 reinforces this, "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." So, just as when we die and no spirit is in the body, there is no person there, if works are not in faith, there is no faith there. Faith is more than simply "believing." I believe the bay bridge is in San Francisco, is safe because it gets thousands of cars across the ocean each day, but that doesn't mean I have enough faith to drive across, since I'm scared of heights. Therefore, believe in the bridge, but do not put my faith in it. Putting your fath into something requires a total commitment, which includes action on the part of the believer.
This brings us to the next passage, the one used by Ray Comfort to supposedly refute Mormonism. Placing Eph. 2:8-9 in the proper context reveals that the purpose of chapter 2 of Ephesians is to refute the idea that Jew and Gentile are saved separately, and is to prove that the blood of Jesus Christ unites both Jew and Gentile. If we back up to verse 1 we get a very dim picture of the Gentiles: "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."
So, we see that these Gentiles did not follow God's laws and were rebellious. They are also described as lustful and children of wrath. You would think this group would be damned, but in verse 4 we are given hope, "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace are ye saved) and hath raised us up together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Now, keep in mind that in verse 2 it uses the phrase "in times past," meaning we are talking about two different times here. Once these people repented they were no longer walking in these sins.
Verse 8, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." So, putting the verse in context, we see that this is a people that have repented, received a free gift of God, and are now to walk in good works that have been ordained of them. This puts this passage in an entirely different light than Comfort puts it. If you read on in the chapter we see in verses 13-16 that he abolished the law and united us in the Gospel, so that Jew and Gentile can now be one people. This one I will discuss in another post.
If you keep reading in Ephesians, after we learn what we have in Christ, Paul tells us in 4:1 to "walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called." This to me sums up nicely what the Mormon man in the video was trying to say. However, instead of deserving, I think he should have used the term "worthy."
I feel that this shows that Comfort was using scripture out of context, distorting the beliefs of Mormonism, condemning Mormons to hell under a false standard, quoting his doctrine as scripture, and accusing Mormons of teaching a works salvation when he himself says we must show evidence of our repentance by works and fruits. Aside from the exaltation belief, there really doesn't seem to be that much difference from Comfort's works salvation and Mormonism's.
To add to the insult a Kirk Cameron cameo is tacked on the front and end of the video talking about some problematic Mormon doctrines for shock value, such as polygamy, Jesus/Satan spirit brothers, and Joseph Smith. Without giving the Mormon defense of these items the video seemed to have the purpose of "poisoning the well" for potential Mormon converts instead of converting Mormons.
In short, I definitely do not recommend this video to anyone wanting to know more about Mormons, whether protestant or otherwise.
To see the video you can copy and paste this link: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121726
Sorry, for some reason they aren't letting me post activated links.
First of all, the man he interviews as representative of Mormonism only says he was "raised Mormon" and does not necessarily identify himself as active or inactive. Comfort goes on to ask the man a series of questions in an effort to determine whether or not he was "saved." Comfort's conclusion is that the man is a thief, adulterer, liar, blasphemer, etc. and is in trouble on judgment day. The man responds throughout the attack by saying that he regrets doing those things (which demonstrates repentance), that only God judges the heart, that Jesus took his sins upon Himself, he does his best and He (Jesus) does the rest, and quotes from James 2 that "Faith without works is dead."
Comfort counters the man by saying that if the believer has to do anything it is considered a payment and no longer grace, thus contradicting the Bible, that salvation cannot be earned. He uses Eph. 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved...not of works, lest any man should boast." He told the man that we show our repentance by our works or fruits. The man countered that we have to make ourselves deserving of God's love and trust. Comfort acted shocked at this and said it contradicted the Ephesians passage in the Bible and that his eternal salvation depends on having the correct view.
Now, before we cover the two Scriptures used in this encounter, I would like to point out that Comfort is employing a classic antimormon twist on semantics here. The term "salvation" means something different in Protestant and Mormon theologies. Mormonism takes the term "salvation" to refer to exaltation, or receiving the maximum amount of rewards in the next life for following God's plan of salvation, and that some who do not receive salvation will still be in one of the lower heavens, having receved less rewards for doing less works or being less valiant in the Gospel. This explains why Jesus Christ mentions that some will be greater in the Kingdom of Heaven, and why Paul says we are rewarded according to our works.
Protestant theology, on the other hand, teaches that salvation is being saved from hell. This theology allows for no middle ground, if you are saved you don't burn for eternity, if you are lost you are condemned to burn in the lake of fire for eternity. Therefore, Mormons who do not know this are naturally going to answer questions in the context of what they believe salvation is. This explains why the man in the video responded that he wasn't sure if he would receive salvation, but moments later said he would be moving "upward" when he died.
To sum it up, Mormonism teaches saved by grace, exalted by works. Protestantism teaches saved by grace, show evidence of being saved by works. Was Ray Comfort aware of this difference when he interviewed the man? I'm not sure, since this is a common misconception among protestants, who don't fully understand Mormon theology. In Mormonism, emphasis is placed on working toward exaltation, not showing evidence of initial conversion. I feel Ray Comfort is wrong in presenting Mormonism out of context, and claiming we are not Christians when we clearly depend on the Atonement of Christ and His death on the cross. The man in the video clearly demonstrated repentance and belief in Christ.
Now, let's take a look at the two Scriptures used in this video, and see if they were used in their proper contexts. James 2:26, "...faith without works is dead." To understand this passage we should look at the context in which James uses it. Earlier in chapter 2 James tells us about those that transgress the law of love given by Christ, that love is the fulfillment of the law. It answers in verse 13, "For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment." This is what sparks the discussion of the relationship of faith and works.
Verse 14 says, "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith and have not works? Can faith save him?" We are given an example of telling a hungry person to be warmed and filled without giving them something, which is like having faith without works. The chapter also uses the example of Abraham offering Isaac on the altar and Rahab the harlot sending the messengers out without divulging their location, which are acts that took great faith in God.
Verses 17 and 18 remind us, "Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." This verse shows us that works are very much apart of faith. You cannot have faith without works.
Verse 26 reinforces this, "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." So, just as when we die and no spirit is in the body, there is no person there, if works are not in faith, there is no faith there. Faith is more than simply "believing." I believe the bay bridge is in San Francisco, is safe because it gets thousands of cars across the ocean each day, but that doesn't mean I have enough faith to drive across, since I'm scared of heights. Therefore, believe in the bridge, but do not put my faith in it. Putting your fath into something requires a total commitment, which includes action on the part of the believer.
This brings us to the next passage, the one used by Ray Comfort to supposedly refute Mormonism. Placing Eph. 2:8-9 in the proper context reveals that the purpose of chapter 2 of Ephesians is to refute the idea that Jew and Gentile are saved separately, and is to prove that the blood of Jesus Christ unites both Jew and Gentile. If we back up to verse 1 we get a very dim picture of the Gentiles: "And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."
So, we see that these Gentiles did not follow God's laws and were rebellious. They are also described as lustful and children of wrath. You would think this group would be damned, but in verse 4 we are given hope, "But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace are ye saved) and hath raised us up together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Now, keep in mind that in verse 2 it uses the phrase "in times past," meaning we are talking about two different times here. Once these people repented they were no longer walking in these sins.
Verse 8, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." So, putting the verse in context, we see that this is a people that have repented, received a free gift of God, and are now to walk in good works that have been ordained of them. This puts this passage in an entirely different light than Comfort puts it. If you read on in the chapter we see in verses 13-16 that he abolished the law and united us in the Gospel, so that Jew and Gentile can now be one people. This one I will discuss in another post.
If you keep reading in Ephesians, after we learn what we have in Christ, Paul tells us in 4:1 to "walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called." This to me sums up nicely what the Mormon man in the video was trying to say. However, instead of deserving, I think he should have used the term "worthy."
I feel that this shows that Comfort was using scripture out of context, distorting the beliefs of Mormonism, condemning Mormons to hell under a false standard, quoting his doctrine as scripture, and accusing Mormons of teaching a works salvation when he himself says we must show evidence of our repentance by works and fruits. Aside from the exaltation belief, there really doesn't seem to be that much difference from Comfort's works salvation and Mormonism's.
To add to the insult a Kirk Cameron cameo is tacked on the front and end of the video talking about some problematic Mormon doctrines for shock value, such as polygamy, Jesus/Satan spirit brothers, and Joseph Smith. Without giving the Mormon defense of these items the video seemed to have the purpose of "poisoning the well" for potential Mormon converts instead of converting Mormons.
In short, I definitely do not recommend this video to anyone wanting to know more about Mormons, whether protestant or otherwise.
Intro: What I Plan To Cover
I'm very excited about my new blog and the opportunity I will have to post my thoughts and essays that I am writing about apologetics. As you can see from my profile, I have a pretty unique perspective on Mormonism, Freemasonry, and Christianity in general, so let me give a few ideas on what will be covered:
Mormonism: I am hoping to post about evidences and inspirations I receive that concern the Scriptures and other influential writings of Mormonism. There's a lot out there plus much to be discovered!
Freemasonry: I hope to cover a lot of historical subjects in this area, as well as some of the philosophical side of the subject. I am currently in the Master Craftsman program so I have been doing a lot of reading in this area. I will also cover the ways masonry relates to Mormonism.
Christianity: I plan to do a review of the doctrines of the protestant denominations I was with over the years, from a doctrinal perspective and not personal. I also plan to do a review of the antimormon and antimasonic movements within Christianity.
I also plan to relate how other traditions tie in with these subjects. Eventually I will activate the Category links as soon as I build up enough posts. Anyway, thanks a lot for stopping by!
Brian
Mormonism: I am hoping to post about evidences and inspirations I receive that concern the Scriptures and other influential writings of Mormonism. There's a lot out there plus much to be discovered!
Freemasonry: I hope to cover a lot of historical subjects in this area, as well as some of the philosophical side of the subject. I am currently in the Master Craftsman program so I have been doing a lot of reading in this area. I will also cover the ways masonry relates to Mormonism.
Christianity: I plan to do a review of the doctrines of the protestant denominations I was with over the years, from a doctrinal perspective and not personal. I also plan to do a review of the antimormon and antimasonic movements within Christianity.
I also plan to relate how other traditions tie in with these subjects. Eventually I will activate the Category links as soon as I build up enough posts. Anyway, thanks a lot for stopping by!
Brian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
