Return to Website

GLO's Exposed Discussion Forum

This is the forum area where you can discuss topics related to the Biblical exposure of Greek organizations. All posts are reviewed; if they are offensive they'll be deleted. 

Any copyrighted material contained herein is for: criticism, comments, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. All used in accordance with the Fair Use Exception 17 USC 107. 

GLO's Exposed Discussion Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
A Masonic, Demonic Twist

Third Degree Obligations
"In some Masonic obligations, there appears a phrase which will cause a law-abiding citizen to pause. While the wording may be slightly different from place to place, the essence of the promise is that a Mason agrees to protect a Brother Master Mason's secrets as his own, murder and treason alone excepted." http://www.masonicinfo.com/treason.htm



"The admonition in the obligation is to impress upon a candidate that a Brother Mason should feel free to share their innermost thoughts without concern about 'blabbing' or reprisal. To suggest that (a) a Mason would commit a criminal act and then (b) tell another Mason about it in order that (c) it would be concealed is foolish in the extreme." http://www.masonicinfo.com/treason.htm

Can I expose the foolishness of this whole thing?

The key phrase, tell another Mason "in order that" (part b). How are you to know that he is just testing the oath? Why would crimes be used for one's innermost personal thoughts? The obligation previously discusses keeping personal secrets, so why use reinforcments with the stress on certain crimes. It already disucusses one obeying the law in the first degree having nothing to do with sharing innermost secrets. I will give you a look see into the 7th and 13th degree obligations, and let's see if this guys explanation holds up.

Re: A Masonic, Demonic Twist

Seventh Degree Obligation
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, whether he be right or wrong."

Now how would the guy in the previous post explain this?

In the next post, I will simply give the obligations in order.