My debate with a freemason

Freemason:  “The Secret Teaching Of All Ages by Manly Palmer Hall?” This writer was an early 20th-century mystic who thought human history was driven by immortals who go from age to age propogating their ideas. He cites the 19th-century essayist Washington Irving as a primary source of information about Islam. He’s nutty as a fruitcake. Why would anyone even dream of crediting him with accuracy about that silly “Masonic oath” at the end of Jacob’s review. This is dim-witted, IMNSHO.

Me:  I’m not arguing for Hall’s sanity; quite the opposite in fact. Sure he is a nut. that’s part of the point. And while you probably missed it, I noted the danger of reading anachronistic sources back into Washington’s time. However, I did assume it was legitimate to assume continuity in Masonic sources. But if you don’t like Hall, I can quote Pike, whose authority and credentials in masonry cannot be questioned.

Freemason: One man does not speak for many…Check the facts Lucifer also refered to the Morning Light (Venus) in ancient times and Pike only spoke for the Southern Juristiction of the Scottish Rite, not Freemasonry as a whole…the uneducated that thinks they know are most dangerous…NO ONE MAN SPEAKS FOR FREEMASONRY…if we were out to take over the world why didn’t we do it when the most powerful men ( US President, British PM and others were Freemasons and almost 7 milliom memebrs) because it is not what we are all about…keep believeing in the ‘bull’ if it makes you feel good…

Me:  I don’t remember saying that Masons have taken over the world. And I don’t think they currently control the world qua masons. I do believe Masonry is part of the synthesis of the religious dimension of the New World Order, but I don’t believe Masonry is synonymous with the New World Order.

As to Pike and Hall, I’ve had this debate with Masons before. They criticize me for not going to Masonic sources, and then they criticize me by saying, “Well, anyone in masonry is free to believe what they want so it doesn’t matter what you say.” But if that is the case, then all masonic writings are hereby meaningless, since they have no authority to compel belief (we can debate epistemological norms, if you want).