Masonry is satanic

0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 StumbleUpon 0 Email -- Filament.io 0 Flares ×

Or is it?

That was the topic of the discussion I had with someone recently after we finished watching a special on TV regarding the Masons. He was of the opinion that Masonry was established by the devil. Pretty odd position to take considering the likes of Joseph Smith and Heber C. Kimball were Masons. Especially considering this person was LDS.

34 thoughts on “Masonry is satanic

  1. Not only was Joseph Smith a mason, but he was the Grand Master of the Nauvoo Lodge.

    My quick search for some background found me this:

    Nauvoo had three lodges and Iowa had two, the five collectively being identified as the “Mormon Lodges.” Nauvoo comprised a total membership of 1550 Masons. A conservative estimate of the membership of the other four lodges suggests that the total of the five lodges may have exceed 2,000 Masons. The minutes of Nauvoo Lodge for Tuesday, March 15, 1842, shows Grand Master Abraham Jonas (Illinois Grand Master) opened the lodge in the 3rd degree of Masonry and conducted a public installation of Nauvoo Lodge “at the grove near the Temple.” The minutes then go on to show that both Joseph Smith, Jr., and Sidney Rigdon “were duly initiated Entered Apprentice Masons during the day.” The record for Wednesday, March 16, ceremonies again lists the two candidates and shows that they were made fellowcraft and Master Masons at sight. The first five Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and Lorenzo Snow were all made Masons in Nauvoo Lodge. Also practically every member of the hierarchy was or became a Mason shortly after the Prophet was raised to the degree of Master Mason. With the marked and well known exception of the justly famous Lodge of Nine Sisters at Paris, France, with its almost incredible roster of French immortals, it is extremely doubtful if any lodge in the history of Freemasonry has met, let alone exceeded, the record of Nauvoo Lodge in the number of members whose memory is perpetuated in ageless bronze or masterful portraiture.

    After Freemasonry was introduced to Nauvoo, the lodge met in the upper room of Joseph Smith’s general store while the new Masonic hall was being built. This was dedicated by Hyrum Smith on April 5, 1844, and used by the church and community for many community activities. It is worth noting that in the restoration of Nauvoo, the Mormon Church restored the building and calls it “The Cultural Hall-Masonic Hall.”

    An interesting side note on the influence that Masonry had in the life of the Mormons is the fact that the weather vane placed on the Nauvoo temple depicted an angel in priestly robes with the Book of Mormon in one hand and a trumpet in the other. The angel is wearing a cap on his head and above him are a square and compass. Religious antagonism and physical conflict increased and finally came to a head with the bloody murders of Joseph and his brother Hyrum when they were shot to death on June 27, 1844. Joseph Smith was a Mason in good standing of Nauvoo Lodge while Hyrum was the incumbent Master of the lodge.

  2. I once had a girlfriend who said that anyone who used a seerstone was satanic also. I pointed out to her that JS used one, but she just simply could not believe it.

  3. Your friend really ought to do some reading on the Masons and how they all started….they worked on Solomon’s temple and apparently learned a lot while doing it!

  4. “they worked on Solomon’s temple”

    I’ve heard this repeated over and over by other LDS people, but I’ve never seen any documented evidence to support this urban legend.

    In fact, all of the evidence I can find supports the idea that the first Freemasons as we know them today appeared in the mid 17th century in England.

    I think Mormons feel it’s important to defend the idea that Masons got their ceremony through Solomon’s Temple because of the dissonance created when one considers where Joseph Smith got his version of the temple ceremony.

    Independent of these issues, it’s a moot point because the ceremonies preformed in Solomon’s Temple are nothing like what the Masons do, nor like what Mormons did in the temple in Joseph Smith’s day, and certainly not like the sanitized present-day version.

  5. When you consider how close what they have is to the actual temple ceremony I would posture that you have to consider the theory. Masons worked on the temple for fourty years and they did not shut down the temple during that time. I’m sure they saw plenty!

    Besides, what is substantiated after hundreds of years?? To me it’s kind of like creation theories. Was it a big gang? Was it designed by God’s hand? How could the Mason’s have come up with something so close to the truth just by chance?

    There’s a lot to be said for something being close to the truth but not quite the truth. Satan loves that stuff! Good way to distract people from the truth. It doesn’t have to be evil…it’s most effective if it ISN’T totally evil – just confusing enough to draw people away.

  6. “When you consider how close what they [The Masons] have is to the actual [LDS] temple ceremony I would posture that you have to consider the theory [that Freemasonry ceremonies originated from ceremonies in Solomon’s Temple]”

    I have considered it, but I would “posture” that you “have” to consider it’s a lot more likely Joseph Smith copied the Masons ceremony merely as a vehicle for teaching about “Celestial Marriage” and the “Plan of Salvation” as opposed to using it as a source of what was done in Solomon’s Temple.

    If Joseph Smith wanted to do the things done in Solomon’s temple, then there would probably be a lot more animal sacrifices and a lot less Masonic symbolism and handshakes in the modern LDS temple.

  7. “When you consider how close what they have is to the actual temple ceremony I would posture that you have to consider the theory.”

    …or Joseph did some borrowing. Which is overwhelmingly more likely, no?

    I’m also very interested in this ‘big gang’ theory you’ve posited. Please, tell me more. ;)

  8. When you consider how close what they have is to the actual temple ceremony I would posture that you have to consider the theory.

    Not really. Just because they are similar, does not mean that Masonry borrowed from Mormonism (or rather the Old Testament version of Mormonism). It could have easily being Mormonism that borrowed from Masonry.

    Masons worked on the temple for fourty years and they did not shut down the temple during that time.

    Assuming of course that the ceremony then resembles the ceremony today and assuming that Masons today are descended from Masons then.

    How could the Mason’s have come up with something so close to the truth just by chance?

    Who says it’s truth? The temple ceremony is very likely nothing more than a figurative vehicle to teach truths.

  9. there would probably be a lot more animal sacrifices . . . in the modern LDS temple

    I’ve always been disappointed in the small number of animal sacrifices in the temples I have attended.

  10. I’m also very interested in this ‘big gang’ theory you’ve >posited. Please, tell me more.

    Oops!! LOL

    Dawn

  11. My husband has read a number of books on this topic. There certainly is a number of people (not LDS) who talk about Masons and King Solomon’s temple in books. He and I have had long talks about this. I haven’t read the books though. I’ll have to get a list from him for you.

  12. Speculation is fun isn’t it. How about looking at the ancient Egyptians. Perhaps one might find things of interest that show it actually goes back to Adam. But what the heck, speculation is more fun than research isn’t it.

  13. Actually speculation often precipitates research. I for one love to research more than speculate and then expound on that research.

  14. Dawn, I never said it was a Mormon-only theory, but it sure makes it handy for Mormons to believe it. If Masonry goes back to Solomon’s temple, then it gives validity to the idea that the endowment ceremony is literal and scripture.

  15. For fun and research study Facsimile #2.
    Just as a matter of interest, Masonic history traces their origins back to Hiram at Solomon’s temple, and some Masonic historians do take it back to ancient Egypt.
    It was restored to popular involvement in the 17th Century, but that is not considered the origin of it at all.

  16. That’s completely speculative, unsubstantiated and not widely accepted, Larry. There is absolutely no concrete evidence that Masonry dates back to Solomon’s temple or further. In fact, the earliest known evidence is from the 1300s (Halliwell Manuscript), and reference to Masonry within it is conceptual at best.

    Until any conclusive evidence comes to light, the idea of dating back to Solomon’s temple is nothing more than a myth, a theory at best.

  17. I’m not trying to sound uppity, but there seems to be more misinformation floating around in this post than normal, so I would suggest that those interested in this topic read Michael Homer’s essay in one of the 1994 Dialogue issues. It presents a good starting point for understanding a fairly sensitive issue.

  18. Actually, no. We’re talking about an area that has to do with temple ritual and the founder of our church. I know that many people struggle with certain issues, such as the connection between Mormonism and Freemasonry. I would rather recommend credible information sources than pontificate on what people should or should not believe.

  19. For myself, I am not too interested in Masonry.

    I am more interested in what happens to certain OTHER characters at the end of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Much more pertinent to keeping me content and satisfied.

  20. I’m with you Mary. I love speculation!! It helps bend my brain around things I might not have thought of. As for the HP&TDH….I’ve really got to get those other ones read first! :0)

  21. Ok, I know this is threadjacking but…which ones haven’t you read? Oh read them, and they are so great and the last book, well it is the best, truly truly and does explain SO much but I still wish for more. :)

  22. Kim,

    Years ago I did my research at the UofC using official masonic material. Unfortunately, due to a few moves that material has been lost. I do think that you might be confusing the Grand Orient with the English versions. As for Solomon’s temple – check out Hiram.

  23. The Mormon Stories Podcast ran an interview with Greg Kearney, who is both an active member (of many genreations) and a Master Mason (of evem more generations).

    I found the interview very interesting. Here is a direct link.

    http://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/MormonStories-005-Masonry.mp3

    Some notes (based on my memory, reader beware):
    – Masonry did not start with Solomon’s Temple.
    – The Mason ceremonies are techniques to teach complex idea about the enlightenment to farmers. Joseph recognized it as a valuable teaching method.
    – Many/most early members of the church were masons, they were used to the mason ceremonies. When they did temple ceremonies it was easy to see and focus on the gospel ideas presented there because that was the stuff that was different then the masonic ceremony. Modern members don’t have this benefit.

  24. I remember years ago that during Temple Recommend interviews one was asked if there was any affliation with Masons. The impression was given that Mason affliation would restrict temple access.

    In comment# 11 Kim Siever said: “Who says it’s truth? The temple ceremony is very likely nothing more than a figurative vehicle to teach truths.”

    Are you suggesting the temple cermony is not literal?

  25. I have never been asked if I am a Mason in a Temple recomend interview. Can’t imagine that even being relevant; guess I’d have to admit to being a Lion and Ducks Unlimited member. lol

  26. Anonymous said: I have never been asked if I am a Mason in a Temple recomend interview.

    I would assume you are under 50 then and did not live in the south United States where it was a Temple question.

  27. You should have clarified, Pew Sitter, that you were referring to persons over 50 and in the southern States. Your previous comment implied that it was a common practiced throughout the church.

  28. I would assume you are under 50 then and did not live in the south United States where it was a Temple question.

    Actually, it has never been a temple recommend question. Most likely you had an over-zealous Priesthood leader. E.g., the 1968 General Handbook stated:

    Members of the Church are strongly advised not to join any organization which is antagonistic to the Church, of which is oath-bound, or of such character as would cause members of the Church to lose interest in Church activities or interfere with performance of their duties.

    Whether Church members who belong to secret oath-bound organizations shall be ordained to or advanced in the priesthood, or given the privileges of the temple, depends upon their standing in the Church and compliance with the regulations governing these privileges.

Leave a Reply