02-13-2005, 10:47 PM
As I stated in an earlier post, one of America's greatest evangelists and stauchest anti-Masons was the Rev. Charles G. Finney, who rose to the forefront in the aftermath of the Captain William Morgan conspiracy and murder to speak out against the Satanic and immoral precepts upon which the Craft is founded.
An ex-Mason himself, Finney's novel THE CHARACTER, CLAIMS AND PRACTICAL WORKINGS OF FREEMASONRY is one of the most comprehensive and yet succinct exposes ever written on Freemasonry and can be viewed online with this link:
THE CHARACTER, CLAIMS AND PRACTICAL WORKINGS OF FREEMASONRY (http://www.gospeltruth.net/1869Freemasonry/indexfreemasonry.htm)
02-22-2005, 02:35 PM
I wonder what ever happened to yeoshua???
He would on occasion spill the beans about something.
02-27-2005, 07:07 AM
Well, here, let me spill the beans for you.
From chapter four of the Rev. Mr. Finney's book on Freemasonry, some actual quotes from a committee report submitted to the Connecticut General Assembly in 1833 in the aftermath of the Morgan scandal:
Secondly. We object to the administration of oaths like those set forth in the petition, because they bind the person receiving them to disregard and violate the law. In one of the oaths, for instance, the person receiving it swears that he will assist a companion of a certain degree, so far as to extricate him from difficulty, whether he be right or wrong. He also swears that he will keep the secrets of a companion of a certain degree without exception, or as the witnesses testified they had heard it administered, "murder and treason not excepted." Now, the committee believe it to be morally wrong, as well as inconsistent with our allegiance to the government under which we live, and a direct violation of the law, to keep secret the commission of any great and flagrant offense against the government. He who conceals treason is himself guilty of misprision of treason. He who conceals murder is himself (in some cases at least) a murderer.
Thirdly. We consider the administration of extra-judicial oaths, especially such as are set forth in said petition, improper, because in their tendency they are opposed to sound morals and are blasphemous. The obligation to assist another so far as to extricate him from difficulty, whether he be right or wrong, and to conceal another's secrets, even though those secrets should involve the highest and most enormous crimes, is most assuredly opposed to the spirit of the Gospel, and to the pure system of morality therein inculcated. And to call upon the great and awful name of Jehovah to give sanction to such obligations is, in our opinion, the height of blasphemy.
Even the most ardent Freemasonic apologists should take note that in what may be the only time that an open and objective investigation of Freemasonry was conducted by a governmental body, it was soundly denounced as an evil racketeering conpsiracy in direct conflict with legal, moral and spiritual law.
But then, what is that compared to the sublime confidence that one always has a "secret in" to help one get ahead, cover up even the most loathesome crimes or persecute and abuse non-Masons to one's supreme advantage?
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.