Print Page | Close Window

Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?

Printed From: Mastermason.com Forums
Category: Forum Lounge (off-topic & lighter discussions)
Forum Name: General Discussions
Forum Description: Non-Esoteric Masonic Discussions
URL: http://forum.mastermason.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=12607
Printed Date: November/17/2019 at 9:51pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?
Posted By: GrimoireA3
Subject: Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?
Date Posted: August/11/2016 at 12:28pm
If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!



Replies:
Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/11/2016 at 12:54pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: Sec'yBob
Date Posted: August/11/2016 at 4:16pm
Many have said that "soul"

Is charity, selflessness, polite, courteous, well mannered, takes care of himself [grooming/dress]

has exposure to books, music, philosophy, respects women, children, animals, has good character above reproach, well spoken etc, and believes in a supreme being.

Soul is your make up, your ID as it were.  You soul is what makes you tick.

If you have these qualities, when you die, you will be remembered by those you touched.  Is that immortality?

I'm asking.................




-------------
Raised 2001
PM Crestwood-Anchor #443
PM Meramec #313 X3
Past DDGM Dist #24
Lodge Education Officer
Missouri Lodge of Research
O.E.S. Chapter 129 WP X2


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/11/2016 at 7:57pm
You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 6:30am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?

Yep. He cannot get to where he wants to go until he defines where he is now. Without an offered definition, the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: pointwithinacircle
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:32am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)


-------------
Words are symbols which point toward concepts arranged in patterns to communicate meaning.


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:40am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)


Yep. It also allows those who read the definition to approach the topic within a specified structure to guide discourse and suitable scrutiny accordingly. Sans a suitable definition as guide and measure, unstructured conjecture shall rule.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: pointwithinacircle
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 8:45am
Personally, I define Spirit as the active force, the force that chooses, does, and creates.  I define soul as the passive force that receives, responds, and is formed.  Using my definition, I don't how it would be possible for any living thing to exist without both a spirit and a soul.


-------------
Words are symbols which point toward concepts arranged in patterns to communicate meaning.


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 11:03am
Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/12/2016 at 2:38pm
Socrates, is that you?


-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 9:51am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.


Hi Coach,

Thanks for that question, because it is the definitive problem which philosophers and theologians have struggled with since time immemorial, i.e. how to define the soul.

But for me to ask for a definition of the soul would require another entirely new thread, so instead of digressing I will stay focused and reiterate the question - what if there is no soul is immortality possible?

P.S. For five hundred years the Great Medieval Debates have produced reams of scrolls and an ocean of iron gall ink debating and arguing over the definition of the soul.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:04am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:

Personally, I define Spirit as the active force, the force that chooses, does, and creates.  I define soul as the passive force that receives, responds, and is formed.  Using my definition, I don't how it would be possible for any living thing to exist without both a spirit and a soul.


Hi Pointwithinacircle,

Excellent reasoning. Good for you. BUT! - it has been stated before and refuted.

For example: The Trichotomic view of humanity has people consisting of a body (soma); soul (psyche), and spirit (pneuma). Yet it has been noted how both 'spirit' and 'soul' are used so interchangeably throughout the Holy Book of Law, scholars have reduced the philosophical/theological view of humanity to only: Body & Soul [a dichotomic view of man]. And this dichotomy (body & soul without spirit) is the accepted condition of mankind.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:19am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


Hi BroScubaSteve,

Actually, yes-it-is.

Socrates in his work The Apology (30a-b) considered the soul to be the psyche and at his trial recommended all his fellow Athenians to perfect all matters of the psyche since all bodily functions/purposes were totally dependent on its perfection.

Socrates said that even after death the psyche/soul existed and was able to think. Socrates believed that as our bodies die and decay, the psyche/soul is continually reborn in other people's bodies, and Socrates student, Plato, also believed in this. Plato also considered the psyche to be the utter essence of a person.

Yet Aristotle totally disbelieved in the immortality of the soul found in the third chapter of his third book: De Anima (On The Soul).

So this is the immortal soul of Socrates living in the web.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:21am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 10:25am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.

So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 11:07am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)



Yes, and that is a fallacy in logic called "Begging the Question" [petition principii]: assuming the truth of a statement a priori without proof.

I intentionally did not provide a definition.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 12:35pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: August/13/2016 at 2:54pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Really...?  

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.  What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus) and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"  Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.  The very thing which it set out to exterminate.  Ironic eh?  LOLWink


-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/14/2016 at 10:33am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.



So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.


Then it is all the more important in order to answer your question to have an even more precise definition of "soul." Since you have pointed out that humans have been mulling this for thousands of years, it seems impossible to arrive at even a broad definition and thus impossible to answer your question.



Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/14/2016 at 1:39pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/14/2016 at 3:47pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.

So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.


Well I said "essentially" to cover any insignificant differences. I would say regardless what you call it, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck... you know the rest. No matter, you are defining the parameters, let's say, of this discussion, so I would say then that if you insist that there is a difference, then we must have an even more precise definition of "soul." Since you have pointed out that humans have been disagreeing for thousands of years over an even broad definition of the word, I would say that without a fairly precise definition, it's going to be impossible to answer your question under the parameters you put on it.

Admin, please delete my first reply to this post, two posts above. At first it didn't take, so I wrote this post. Thanks.


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/14/2016 at 3:51pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


No, I'm over here, six feet under the hemlock tree.


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/15/2016 at 10:06am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Socrates, is that you?


Hi BroScubaSteve,

Actually, yes-it-is.

Socrates in his work The Apology (30a-b) considered the soul to be the psyche and at his trial recommended all his fellow Athenians to perfect all matters of the psyche since all bodily functions/purposes were totally dependent on its perfection.

Socrates said that even after death the psyche/soul existed and was able to think. Socrates believed that as our bodies die and decay, the psyche/soul is continually reborn in other people's bodies, and Socrates student, Plato, also believed in this. Plato also considered the psyche to be the utter essence of a person.

Yet Aristotle totally disbelieved in the immortality of the soul found in the third chapter of his third book: De Anima (On The Soul).

So this is the immortal soul of Socrates living in the web.
I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.




-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/15/2016 at 10:08am
oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!


-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/16/2016 at 3:56pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 8:30am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.






-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 10:56am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.

That's referred to as an "in-joke". Gotcha!







-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 10:59am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.




-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:06am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Then the expression has no meaning. Reformation gibberish?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:22am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.


Adept2, you may not realize it but you sound exactly how the anti-Masons argue against Freemasonry - the same use of stereotypes, innuendo, bias, misconceptions, and some slander.



-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:25am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.


Coach,

Be very careful of absolute statements! Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 11:28am
Originally posted by pointwithinacircle pointwithinacircle wrote:



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

First define "soul" and then prove without a shadow of a doubt that a man has one.
LOL - Coach, you should know that a man can prove anything if he is allowed to write the definitions.   :-)



Pointwithinacircle,

You seem to have rediscovered a famous maxim from the American philosopher (from Harvard) W. V. Quine, who stated: "That nearly any statement can be made to fit with the data, so long as one makes the 'requisite compensatory adjustments'. (~1964?)

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 4:17pm
It makes no difference to me how you attempt to rationalize your religion, and your beliefs.  The fact remains that there is no evidence for any of them.  Until such time as there is empirical evidence, I will continue to regard all religions and religious belief, as utter and complete bullcrap
I was not being intentionally "slanderous" but I do regard all religion with contempt.  Catholicism in particular.  I don't think I need explain the vile and evil acts committed by the institution.  They are well documented in both ancient and recent history.



-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:17pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

oh oh oh!

I do not have a soul, but I do posses a substitute!

And that substitute being what?
It's a joke.

It has nothing to do with a "soul" in freemasonry though so don't read too much into it.

Kind of like when engineers joke with each other. Laymen don't get it unless you're in the profession.

Being a retired engineer, I got it.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:21pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Then the expression has no meaning. Reformation gibberish?

If you want to understand, you best examine your claim in light of the faith itself. Idols do exist. RCs are asked to not worship false idols. However, I can tell you that there are many within the RC faith who worship idols within the RC everyday practices believing them to be not false.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:29pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.

Yet, it occurs within the faith and does so daily.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?

Invalid invalidation.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.

So, by calling them saints, and not minor-gods, that invalidates the claim?

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.

So, praying to an entity outside the HT is okay and not a sign of idolatry?

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.

With a host of saints, not minor-gods, all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/17/2016 at 5:35pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... Does something else substitute for a soul?

There is no substitute; it's either there, or it is not.


Coach,

Be very careful of absolute statements! Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted.

Take care in your loosely issued warnings.

Although "Quite a few elements and concepts can be substituted", substitutes, by their very nature, are not the real thing. Sure, one can substitute the real thing, and it might do the job of the real thing, but it is not and never will be the real thing.

HENCE...Be very careful of substitute claims and statements for they are but idols and should never be the focus of worship!

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/18/2016 at 6:36am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.


Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.


-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/21/2016 at 6:56am
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.


Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.


<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a
small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise
answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is
integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited? That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.

And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.




-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/21/2016 at 7:27am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.
Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.
<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited?


If you're not joking: Why would that be important to anyone seeking and obtaining truth authentically, honestly and openly?

If you're joking: HAR!!! HAR!!!
Quote That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.

Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Are you blind?

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/22/2016 at 6:17am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

I was commenting on the Socratic method of postings here on Mastermason.com more than his actual philosophies.
Interesting, since I haven't yet read a Socratic Method of reasoning on any post since I've been participating on these forums. Nor a syllogism.
<span ="_tgc"="">Socratic dialogue is a formal method by which a small group (5-15 people), guided by a facilitator, finds a precise answer to a universal question (e.g. "What is happiness?", "What is integrity?", "Can conflict be fruitful?", etc.).

Basically, a man walked the streets and started talking to total strangers to ponder life and the world around them to arrive at a truth or common ground that can be accepted.

If this type of dialogue isn't Socratic, then my University better refund me my money.
</span>


Is your university accredited?


If you're not joking: Why would that be important to anyone seeking and obtaining truth authentically, honestly and openly?


Because I matched sarcasm for sarcasm? Because I corrected BroscubaSteve's error and received a false validation?

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

If you're joking: HAR!!! HAR!!!


Yes, I made a funny - YUK!!!! YUK!!!!!


Quote That is a definition of dialectics or of free association to solve a problem.

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.


That's a Wikipedia definition! Not an example of your understanding of the Socratic Method. Wikipedia has been refuted as a valid citation by every professional scholar in America's universities. Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports, but not for scholarly research nor for intellectual discussion. So stop quoting Wikipedia if you want to be taken seriously as an intellectual! Wikipedia is academic idolatry!

So coach, if you want to impress with an understanding of the Socratic Method, try citing a primary source, like Socrates, and read a good translation from his student (since Socrates wrote noting down).

Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Are you blind?


Nope, 20/20! And I perfectly see there is no Socratic Method used here since I've been participating on Mastermason forums! And no Freemason yet has demonstrated an understanding of that concept - not even you coach.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/22/2016 at 9:00am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

The Socratic Method is a teaching method of asking a series of questions which will guide the student to the already known correct answer, a technique of explaining a difficult concept to the uninitiated. Not a method of truth seeking.

If I knew the answer to my own question, yet others were unable to grasp the concept then, like Socrates, I would use the Socratic Method to ask a series of questions to guide you to the correct answer.
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

That's one opinion. Here's another: Socratic method, also known as maieutics, method of elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate, is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions.


That's a Wikipedia definition!


No kidding. What gave it away?

Quote Not an example of your understanding of the Socratic Method.

Actually, your statement is wrong. It is my understanding of the Socratic method. I bolded the more agreeable parts for greater emphasis and to point out to you my understanding.
Quote Wikipedia has been refuted as a valid citation by every professional scholar in America's universities.

So what! It provides to me the words that express quite clearly my understanding. You appear to be one who would throw a baby out with its bathwater.

Quote Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports, but not for scholarly research nor for intellectual discussion.


Is that what we are doing here? scholarly research or intellectual discussion? Based upon your not yet defining what "soul" is after how many days, I can't say that either criteria is being met at this point.

Quote So stop quoting Wikipedia if you want to be taken seriously as an intellectual!


You seriously misunderstand what I want out of this.

Quote Wikipedia is academic idolatry!


But I thought for you as an RC, idolatry is something that you don't believe in?

Nevertheless, your point is moot. What I reposted is an opinion. I share it without reservation. As far as what wiki is good for, man are you barking up the wrong tree.

Quote So coach, if you want to impress with an understanding of the Socratic Method, try citing a primary source, like Socrates, and read a good translation from his student (since Socrates wrote noting down).


Thanks. There are no primary Socratic sources. The man didn't write anything down. Socrates was "supposedly" the teacher of Plato. His stories were likely a Platonic fabrication. But that's another rabbit hole for another day.

BTW - When I truly want to impress, I'll let you know.

Quote
Quote And I still haven't seen the Socratic Method used on Masonic Forums.

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Are you blind?


Nope, 20/20!


As per your offered definition, the question was designed to lead you to an already known answer. It appears from your response that more questions are required.

Quote And I perfectly see...


Man, you sure do have a high opinion of your abilities.

Quote ...there is no Socratic Method used here since I've been participating on Mastermason forums! And no Freemason yet has demonstrated an understanding of that concept - not even you coach.


Once again, your opinion.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/22/2016 at 10:24pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports...

Not in my classes. Although I do not teach grade school per se, I teach special education students in the high school, the vast majority of whom are at an elementary (grade school) level. I do not allow my students to use wikipedia in research.

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/23/2016 at 5:14am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Wikipedia is good for solving barroom arguments or research for grade school book reports...


Not in my classes. Although I do not teach grade school per se, I teach special education students in the high school, the vast majority of whom are at an elementary (grade school) level. I do not allow my students to use wikipedia in research.

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


AMEN!

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/23/2016 at 5:20am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Yes, I noticed the same thing. In fact, almost every thread has digressed into some sort of 'one up manship' contest.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/23/2016 at 7:21am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Anyway, this thread is turning into a p*ssing contest, and I realize I just contributed to it- my apologies- but can we get off it and return to more intellectual and civil discussion?


Yes, I noticed the same thing. In fact, almost every thread has digressed into some sort of 'one up manship' contest.
Welcome to the internet.


-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/24/2016 at 8:55am
Originally posted by Sec'yBob Sec'yBob wrote:

Many have said that "soul"

Is charity, selflessness, polite, courteous, well mannered, takes care of himself [grooming/dress]

has exposure to books, music, philosophy, respects women, children, animals, has good character above reproach, well spoken etc, and believes in a supreme being.

Soul is your make up, your ID as it were.  You soul is what makes you tick.



If you have these qualities, when you die, you will be remembered by those you touched.  Is that immortality?

I'm asking.................




Yes, many have summed up the attributes of a soul. And what is more interesting is every religion which acknowledges a 'soul' has a different set of attributes. (Too many to list here).

Now, assuming there is such thing as a soul, is immortality possible without it??

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/24/2016 at 9:00am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

... assuming there is such thing as a soul, is immortality possible without it??

Once you have define what it is, then such a question could be entertained within that offered definition.

However, since you have yet to define "soul", anything put forth is fancy filled unfounded conjecture.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: August/24/2016 at 9:20am
Grimoire,

Several have asked you several times to provide your definition of "soul" and you have not responded. Is there a reason you are not doing so? I really would like to know what you have to say about it.


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 10:56am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Yes, the Catholic Church acknowledges the existence of idols and does not believe in them, nor teaches the belief in idols. The reference is obtuse.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 11:13am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Yet, it occurs within the faith and does so daily.


Not in the Western Rite Catholic Church it doesn't!


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Invalid invalidation.


Coach! - shame on you!! Tsk Tsk, you did not recognize the 'argumentum ad absurdum' refutation? You lose 2 pts.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

So, by calling them saints, and not minor-gods, that invalidates the claim?


Minor Gods??? Coach, I question your knowledge of Catholicism. I question your knowledge of the beatification process. The Catholic Church has never ever ever even suggested that any saint ever approached godhood. The closest synonym for a saint might be a hero, but never a minor-god. -10 pts.

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

So, praying to an entity outside the HT is okay and not a sign of idolatry?


NOPE! - Coach, you claimed to have been a Catholic so you should know the answer to that: Praying to something does not connote idolatry since the Catholic Church teaches against idolatry (and some have paid the ultimate price of heresy for doing so). How is venerating the mother of God or of a saint an instance of idolatry merely by praying??

[quote]
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

With a host of saints, not minor-gods, all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?


Whaaaaa??? That ungrammatical non-sentence totally lacks clarity and rigour ["....., all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?"] come on coach? Could you please re-phrase that so it makes sense???

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 11:24am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

If you want to understand, you best examine your claim in light of the faith itself.


Exactly as I have been maintaining. The Catholic Church frowns on idol worship and always has for the past 2016 years of its existence. No practicing Roman Catholic (Western Rite Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic) believes in idols, as instructed by the Catholic faith.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Idols do exist.


That's a 'Truism'(i.e. pointless fact) - so what's your point?? The Catholic faith acknowledges the existence of idols and of idol worship and has always 'frowned' on it (inquisitions, excommunications, banishments, etc.).

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

RCs are asked to not worship false idols.


No kidding? Actually RCs are ordered by the Magisterium not to worship 'any' idol, true or false.

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

However, I can tell you that there are many within the RC faith who worship idols within the RC everyday practices believing them to be not false.


Which only means they are not in commune with the Catholic faith and are not true Catholics - so what's your point?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 11:29am
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

You asked does something else substitute for a soul- mind, life force, metabolism... If these are substitutes for a soul, then does that not mean that these too are essentially the soul, so it would be merely a question of semantics? If not, I would have to ask, like Coach, what is your definition of "soul"?


Hi droche,

If something is substituted, then there is an exchange of something different, not equal.

So if the soul is substituted, then there is no soul. An ersatzsoul is not a soul, but something else.


[QUOTE=droche]I would say regardless what you call it, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck... you know the rest.


{just a quick digression}:Yes, I do know the rest: "if it looks like a duck...etc." is the problem of induction - is it not? Just because it looks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, and so on, does not mean its a duck! Just a quick criticism of the obvious problem of induction. Sorry for this minor digression.



-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 12:23pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by Coach Coach wrote:

the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


LOL!


Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

I grew up in the RC faith too and although we do not believe in idols, we do believe that they do exist. Hence the reference, and it is valid.


Yes, the Catholic Church acknowledges the existence of idols and does not believe in them, nor teaches the belief in idols. The reference is obtuse.

Apparently it was obtuse enough for you to look up the Baconian Idols and start a new thread on one of them. I'd say that my reference was quite successful, and obtusely so... Thanks!

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 12:33pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:



Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Glad I grew up in the Roman Catholic faith because us Catholics do not believe in idols.

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Really...?  


Yes, really. The Catholic Church frowns on idolatry.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Yet, it occurs within the faith and does so daily.


Not in the Western Rite Catholic Church it doesn't!


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Idol worship (depending on which definition you use) would fit catholicism perfectly in my opinion.


The opinion of a non-Catholic with obvious biases and a questionable command of comparative religion?


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Invalid invalidation.


Coach! - shame on you!! Tsk Tsk, you did not recognize the 'argumentum ad absurdum' refutation? You lose 2 pts.


Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

What with all their saints (some prayed to in place of god or jesus)


NOPE, never. No, the saints are not part of the Holy Trinity, therefore no Catholic puts the saints in place of Jesus or God himself. I consider that slanderous.



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

So, by calling them saints, and not minor-gods, that invalidates the claim?


Minor Gods??? Coach, I question your knowledge of Catholicism. I question your knowledge of the beatification process. The Catholic Church has never ever ever even suggested that any saint ever approached godhood. The closest synonym for a saint might be a hero, but never a minor-god. -10 pts.

Quote
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

and the "virgin" mary (almost explicitly prayed to before god or jesus) hence the term "hail mary"


Again, NOPE, Total misinterpretation. The mother of God is rightfully venerated, but Mary is also not part of the Holy Trinity therefore no Catholic puts her before the father, son, or the holy ghost.



Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

So, praying to an entity outside the HT is okay and not a sign of idolatry?


NOPE! - Coach, you claimed to have been a Catholic so you should know the answer to that: Praying to something does not connote idolatry since the Catholic Church teaches against idolatry (and some have paid the ultimate price of heresy for doing so). How is venerating the mother of God or of a saint an instance of idolatry merely by praying??

[quote]
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Catholicism, at the very least, borders on what could very easily be viewed as poly-theism.


Hardly. The triune God is one. The concept of the Trinity was the result of 500 years of Catholic participation in the Great Medieval debates [the theists vs. the atheists] on the attributes of God, and the Trinity is an advanced concept not commonly understood by non-Roman catholics. Catholicism is also accepted as one of the world's monotheistic religions.


Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

With a host of saints, not minor-gods, all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?


Whaaaaa??? That ungrammatical non-sentence totally lacks clarity and rigour ["....., all who one can pray to for whatever their specialty is?"] come on coach? Could you please re-phrase that so it makes sense???

When you learn to quote so that what you post makes sense, I'll respond. Until then, I'll use your word to label your post: Obtuse.

In the meantime, I shall move on.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 12:59pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

If you want to understand, you best examine your claim in light of the faith itself.
Exactly as I have been maintaining. The Catholic Church frowns on idol worship and always has for the past 2016 years of its existence. No practicing Roman Catholic (Western Rite Catholic or Eastern Rite Catholic) believes in idols, as instructed by the Catholic faith.
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Idols do exist.
That's a 'Truism'(i.e. pointless fact) - so what's your point?? The Catholic faith acknowledges the existence of idols and of idol worship and has always 'frowned' on it (inquisitions, excommunications, banishments, etc.).

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

RCs are asked to not worship false idols.
No kidding? Actually RCs are ordered by the Magisterium not to worship 'any' idol, true or false.
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

However, I can tell you that there are many within the RC faith who worship idols within the RC everyday practices believing them to be not false.
Which only means they are not in commune with the Catholic faith and are not true Catholics - so what's your point?


What's my point? It should have been clear by my previous post. Let me repeat myself.

You cannot get to where you want to go until you define where you are now. Without an offered definition for "soul", the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: BroScubaSteve
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 1:27pm
Is this merry-go-round over yet?




-------------
Initiated 4-22-13
Passed 5-29-13
Raised 6-27-13

Junior Deacon
F&AM GLNJ
32°AASR NMJ, Southern Valley of NJ


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 2:04pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:

Is this merry-go-round over yet?

Sure wish it were.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 5:23pm
Originally posted by BroScubaSteve BroScubaSteve wrote:


Is this merry-go-round over yet?







Hardly a merry-go-round since these forums are setup for rebuttal with 'quote' buttons available. Besides, how is one to correct coach's misconceptions about the Roman Catholic Church (western rite) unless you make a rebuttal?

Meanwhile the topic question remains unanswered.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: August/31/2016 at 7:42pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Meanwhile the topic question remains unanswered.


I'm beginning to think that has been your intention all along...

Create a topic, ask a question that can only really be answered with opinion (since there is no way to collect empirical data on the subject) and debate tediously until everyone is tired of it.

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 6:25am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...Meanwhile the topic question remains unanswered.

You have no one but yourself to blame.

The topic question was legitimately questioned and you remain steadfast in not addressing the legitimate question that prevents your topic question from being addressed properly.

BTW - It's a troll's move to complain about lack of forward momentum when you're the one sabotaging forward momentum.

You want movement? Clarify the topic question and answer it yourself.


-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 6:29am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Meanwhile the topic question remains unanswered.


I'm beginning to think that has been your intention all along...

Create a topic, ask a question that can only really be answered with opinion (since there is no way to collect empirical data on the subject) and debate tediously until everyone is tired of it.

Although I agree with your assessment of his intention, Empirical data can be collected, but only after the subject of study is clearly identified.

That latter part has yet to be done. So, nothing can be said specifically as to what is behind the curtain since the curtain remains in place.... and I believe this is purposeful.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 8:24am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

 The topic question was legitimately questioned and you remain steadfast in not addressing the legitimate question that prevents your topic question from being addressed properly.

But not legitimately answered.  

Gentlemen, if you don't know the answer to a question, just admit it.


-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 8:26am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Meanwhile the topic question remains unanswered.


I'm beginning to think that has been your intention all along...

Create a topic, ask a question that can only really be answered with opinion (since there is no way to collect empirical data on the subject) and debate tediously until everyone is tired of it.

Adept?,

Consider this as constructive criticism only, you used the Lawyer's fallacy of Making the case fit the facts - that is, you are rationalizing.

If you don't understand the question, or if you don't know the answer - just admit it without all the prevarications.  Remember: Equivocation is not Elucidation!


-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 8:35am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Apparently it was obtuse enough for you to look up the Baconian Idols and start a new thread on one of them.

Yes, I looked up Baconian Idols on Wikipedia and got the standard lame, vague, and superficial definitions wiki is noted for.  

So then I placed the question on this forum hoping for an an intelligent and expert opinion on the subject of Baconian Idols yet all I got was a lame-o, vague and nebulous Wikipedia explanation.  What gives?

But that's O.K., Amazon.com provided an insightful and clear explanation of Bacon's empiricism.


-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 9:02am
FYI: There is a religion that believes there is NO soul: Homaranismo from the 19th century.  (The name is spelled in Esperanto).

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 9:35am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

The topic question was legitimately questioned and you remain steadfast in not addressing the legitimate question that prevents your topic question from being addressed properly.
]But not legitimately answered.

Agreed! Please provide the answer and stop your trolling.
Quote Gentlemen, if you don't know the answer to a question, just admit it.

more trolling...

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Apparently it was obtuse enough for you to look up the Baconian Idols and start a new thread on one of them.
 What gives?

Amazing. Based upon your trolling, that's exactly what I am thinking.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 9:44am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

The topic question was legitimately questioned and you remain steadfast in not addressing the legitimate question that prevents your topic question from being addressed properly.
]But not legitimately answered.

Agreed! Please provide the answer and stop your trolling.
Quote Gentlemen, if you don't know the answer to a question, just admit it.

more trolling...

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Apparently it was obtuse enough for you to look up the Baconian Idols and start a new thread on one of them.
 What gives?

Amazing. Based upon your trolling, that's exactly what I am thinking.

And how are valid inquiries and legitimate questions and answers construed as 'trolling'? - especially when no one seems to know the answer or admit they don't know??


-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 10:34am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...especially when no one seems to know the answer or admit they don't know??


Including yourself in that? You've been asked multiple times by multiple people to clarify the subject, and have yet to do so.

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 10:49am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...especially when no one seems to know the answer or admit they don't know??


Including yourself in that? You've been asked multiple times by multiple people to clarify the subject, and have yet to do so.


Top Ten Unanswered Thread Questions:
1) How is the word "soul" being defined by the original poster?
2) How is the word "immortality" being defined by the original poster?
3) Why are the answers to these two questions not important enough to be provided by the original poster?
4) Does anyone really care about any of this at this point?
5) If all the experts agree, why is any of this even being discussed?
6) Why would expert agreement be even tendered as part of the conversation?
7) Why is wiki important enough to bash?
8) Do trolls have souls?
9) If trolls had souls, would that mean that they could be immortal?
10) If a troll wanted to know if he had a soul, how would he empirically test for it?

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: September/01/2016 at 12:41pm
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:


Top Ten Unanswered Thread Questions:
1) How is the word "soul" being defined by the original poster?
2) How is the word "immortality" being defined by the original poster?
3) Why are the answers to these two questions not important enough to be provided by the original poster?
4) Does anyone really care about any of this at this point?
5) If all the experts agree, why is any of this even being discussed?
6) Why would expert agreement be even tendered as part of the conversation?
7) Why is wiki important enough to bash?
8) Do trolls have souls?
9) If trolls had souls, would that mean that they could be immortal?
10) If a troll wanted to know if he had a soul, how would he empirically test for it?

LOL!  LOLROTFL
Love it!


-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 4:50am
Originally posted by gromoirea3 gromoirea3 wrote:

is immortality possible if man has no soul?


    As I've defined "soul/spirit" in the other thread, no immortality is not possible in that sense. We die, all our organs shut down, including the brain, and our conciseness contained within it, or powered by it, and we cease to exist. Immortality is only possible through our works in life, and the impact those works had on society and those around us. The memory of which contained in others and passed on to others is the only way to be immortal, but only in the metaphysical sense.

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 9:16am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by gromoirea3 gromoirea3 wrote:

is immortality possible if man has no soul?


Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Immortality is only possible through our works in life, and the impact those works had on society and those around us.


That's interesting. I've heard that before. But wouldn't that be a type of Artificial Immortality?

I've also heard that 'memory' is a type of immortality.

And that children are also a type of immortality.

Or that history is a type of immortality.

But then again, science has been working on a 'real' physical immortality.

And the question follows: Can all this be done without a soul? (if the soul exists that is). Interesting stuff.



[QUOTE=Adept?]The memory of which contained in others and passed on to others is the only way to be immortal, but only in the metaphysical sense.


Yes, memory immortality. Memory is a non-tangible element, an abstraction with no physical or corporeal presence. A metaphysical subject in the study of phenomenology with a ream of research papers to sift through. Yet science does strive to achieve physical immortality. Do you feel that is a realistic objective?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 9:19am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by gromoirea3 gromoirea3 wrote:

is immortality possible if man has no soul?


    As I've defined "soul/spirit" in the other thread, no immortality is not possible in that sense. We die, all our organs shut down, including the brain, and our conciseness contained within it, or powered by it, and we cease to exist. Immortality is only possible through our works in life, and the impact those works had on society and those around us. The memory of which contained in others and passed on to others is the only way to be immortal, but only in the metaphysical sense.


P.S. Thank you for directing your answer to the topic question and not avoiding it.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 9:36am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...especially when no one seems to know the answer or admit they don't know??


Including yourself in that? You've been asked multiple times by multiple people to clarify the subject, and have yet to do so.


Top Ten Unanswered Thread Questions:
1) How is the word "soul" being defined by the original poster?
2) How is the word "immortality" being defined by the original poster?
3) Why are the answers to these two questions not important enough to be provided by the original poster?
4) Does anyone really care about any of this at this point?
5) If all the experts agree, why is any of this even being discussed?
6) Why would expert agreement be even tendered as part of the conversation?
7) Why is wiki important enough to bash?
8) Do trolls have souls?
9) If trolls had souls, would that mean that they could be immortal?
10) If a troll wanted to know if he had a soul, how would he empirically test for it?


PUH-LEASE STOP HIJACKING MY THREAD WITH YOUR OWN QUESTIONS. Stop demanding I answer your question within my own topic thread. Please just answer the topic question without inserting your own. If you need to take over somebody elses topic, please just start your own. Thank you!

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 10:08am
Quote ... Memory is a non-tangible element, an abstraction with no physical or corporeal presence. ...


LOL! I'd like to see this guy explain Hard Drive Crashes and Flash Drive failures. Both are PHYSICAL MEMORIES and very tangible.





-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 10:10am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

PUH-LEASE STOP HIJACKING MY THREAD WITH YOUR OWN QUESTIONS. Stop demanding I answer your question within my own topic thread. Please just answer the topic question without inserting your own. If you need to take over somebody elses topic, please just start your own. Thank you!


And a quick follow up...

11) When will the whining end?

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 10:29am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

PUH-LEASE STOP HIJACKING MY THREAD WITH YOUR OWN QUESTIONS. Stop demanding I answer your question within my own topic thread. Please just answer the topic question without inserting your own. If you need to take over somebody elses topic, please just start your own. Thank you!


And a quick follow up...

11) When will the whining end?


When you act your age and give mature reasonable answers to valid and sincere questions.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 10:31am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

Quote ... Memory is a non-tangible element, an abstraction with no physical or corporeal presence. ...


LOL! I'd like to see this guy explain Hard Drive Crashes and Flash Drive failures. Both are PHYSICAL MEMORIES and very tangible.





You do realize that you used a sentence fragment out of context?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 10:38am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...especially when no one seems to know the answer or admit they don't know??


Including yourself in that? You've been asked multiple times by multiple people to clarify the subject, and have yet to do so.


Nobody has asked me to clarify ANYTHING. Everybody has demanded that I define everything, and very few have actually answered the topic question.

In fact I have gone out of my way to clarify my position several times without being asked.

I am asking a QUESTION - which is a request for an answer. If I could answer my own question then I wouldn't have to ask it in the first place. And it is the policy of the History graduate degree (which I possess) that if you don't know, you say so!! That is a matter of professional decorum.

So again, as Professors demand in college, if you don't know the answer or if you don't understand the question - just admit it. 'Alle is Klar'?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/02/2016 at 11:01am
If Grimoire claims:
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Nobody has asked me to clarify ANYTHING.

And, someone has already asked for exactly that:
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

You want movement? Clarify the topic question and answer it yourself.

Than:
Grimoire's claim is questionable.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/03/2016 at 10:24am

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

You want movement? Clarify the topic question and answer it yourself.


What part of "Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?" don't you understand? How much more simple a question can be posed?

Please just answer the question without inserting your own question to hijack the thread and prove yourself a psuedointellectual. If you don't know the answer just say so.


-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/03/2016 at 10:28am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:



Top Ten Unanswered Thread Questions:
1) How is the word "soul" being defined by the original poster?
2) How is the word "immortality" being defined by the original poster?
3) Why are the answers to these two questions not important enough to be provided by the original poster?
4) Does anyone really care about any of this at this point?
5) If all the experts agree, why is any of this even being discussed?
6) Why would expert agreement be even tendered as part of the conversation?
7) Why is wiki important enough to bash?
8) Do trolls have souls?
9) If trolls had souls, would that mean that they could be immortal?
10) If a troll wanted to know if he had a soul, how would he empirically test for it?



Don't ridicule what you don't understand! - invective is the last resort of the lout! If you don't have a college level understanding of logical analysis or systems of reasoning, then don't make a fool of yourself by ridiculing what you obvious do not understand like a child.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/03/2016 at 11:36am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

You want movement? Clarify the topic question and answer it yourself.
What part of "Is Immortality possible if man has no soul?" don't you understand?
1) Your definition of "mortality".
2) Your definition of "soul".
3) Your definition of "man".
4) Your definition of "possible".
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

How much more simple a question can be posed?
How many simple assumptions do you want made from your simple question?
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Please just answer the question without inserting your own question to hijack the thread and prove yourself a pseudointellectual[SIC].
Yes, please do.
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

   If you don't know the answer just say so.
Yes. Please do!

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/03/2016 at 11:41am
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Don't ridicule what you don't understand!

I wish this "Doctor", would heal himself.
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

...invective is the last resort of the lout!
I wonder how this guy feels to be occupying a space at that resort?
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If you don't have a college level understanding of logical analysis or systems of reasoning, then don't make a fool of yourself by ridiculing what you obvious do not understand like a child.
This guy has a weird idea as to what constitutes ridicule.

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: goomba
Date Posted: September/03/2016 at 12:39pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


No.

NOTE: Being that the question is answered can we close the thread.

-------------
MM, RAM, RSM, KT, KM, SRICF

Living in the DC area.


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/06/2016 at 5:41pm
Originally posted by goomba goomba wrote:

Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

If man, in fact, does not possess a soul - is immortality still possible? Does something else substitute for a soul? Mind? Life force? Metabolism?


No.

NOTE: Being that the question is answered can we close the thread.


YES, please. And thank you for a direct answer to a valid question by a Freemason instead of all the idiotic responses and obvious cant and sophistry by a self appointed spokesman for Masonic thought.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: coach
Date Posted: September/06/2016 at 6:44pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

YES, please. And thank you for a direct answer to a valid question by a Freemason instead of all the idiotic responses and obvious cant and sophistry by a self appointed spokesman for Masonic thought.
Careful. You're now mounting an ad homonym on a forum member rather than attacking the issue at hand: You're choice to not answer simple direct questions.   

-------------
Building Builders - Masonic Education!

http://www.coach.net/BuildingBuilders.htm" rel="nofollow - Books I Wrote | http://www.facebook.com/johns.nagy" rel="nofollow - My FB Wall


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: September/06/2016 at 9:07pm
I know I'm not a moderator anymore, but enough with the personal insults.

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 10:26am
Originally posted by coach coach wrote:

What's my point? It should have been clear by my previous post. Let me repeat myself.

You cannot get to where you want to go until you define where you are now. Without an offered definition for "soul", the entire conversation becomes an exercise of Baconian "Idol's of the Marketplace" dribble.


Mere opinion.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 10:30am
Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

I know I'm not a moderator anymore, but enough with the personal insults.


Hear that coach?

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: goomba
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 3:00pm
You should stop being so rude. You are a guest here.

-------------
MM, RAM, RSM, KT, KM, SRICF

Living in the DC area.


Posted By: droche
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 4:11pm
Grimoire,

Your posts are morphing from questions about Freemasonry to your opinions about how Freemasonry should be. You are of course entitled to these opinions, but for a non-Mason to be telling or appear to be telling Masons how their organization should be is alienating them. You are bringing up good points in my opinion, but you need to tone things down. I know it takes two to Tango but people here have been Masons for years and will resent a non-Mason telling them what it is or should be like. 


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 4:15pm
Originally posted by goomba goomba wrote:

You should stop being so rude. You are a guest here.


Yes, thank you.

I am asserting myself a little too vehemently sometimes.

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: GrimoireA3
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 4:16pm
Originally posted by droche droche wrote:

Grimoire,

Your posts are morphing from questions about Freemasonry to your opinions about how Freemasonry should be. You are of course entitled to these opinions, but for a non-Mason to be telling or appear to be telling Masons how their organization should be is alienating them. You are bringing up good points in my opinion, but you need to tone things down. I know it takes two to Tango but people here have been Masons for years and will resent a non-Mason telling them what it is or should be like. 


O.K, gotcha. Thank you!

-------------
Please Note: I am not a Mason. And also, I am not an anti-Mason!


Posted By: Adept?
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 6:02pm
Originally posted by GrimoireA3 GrimoireA3 wrote:

Originally posted by Adept? Adept? wrote:

I know I'm not a moderator anymore, but enough with the personal insults.


Hear that coach?


Umm... Yea... That was directed equally toward you Grim. Come on...   

-------------
"It is humanity that creates god, and men think that god has made them in his image, because they make him in theirs."


Posted By: edwmax
Date Posted: September/08/2016 at 9:55pm
After reading the last 2 days comments, this thread is LOCKED!

 Lets move on to something more interesting, ... Was the 3 Stooges  Freemasons?


-------------
"He who would assume to govern others must first learn to govern himself."





Thomasville 369



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net