Masons have mostly been interested in influencing the government, but have they tried to influence or found denominations? How can you tell if they did?

The theology that they program their initiates to is;

• Universalism - that all religions worship the same God, they just call Him by different names.
• That all theology can be derived from reason and what is before you.  That is, there's no need for a "Bible" or other Holy Writings.  Any type of writing deemed "canon" is a threat to Masonic ideas.

Masonry is reported as built on first convincing you of these 2 axioms, then building on that to convince you of the rest.  Perhaps this is why the Masons prefer recruiting Protestants over Catholics because there are two factors that, in their perception, make Protestants easier to "deprogram" from the Gospel and towards a Masonic point of view

• Protestants don't accept Church tradition, Catholics do.
• Their Bible is smaller.  More writings means more ideas to deprogram someone from.
• Catholics have made statements adding to salvation requirements by suggesting one must belong to the universal church to be saved.

In my estimation, they are probably wrong about Protestants being easier to convert, but they seem to reason it this way.  So Masons WILL NOT introduce you to the book of Enoch and ask you to accept it as God inspired, nor ask you to accept the Vedic writings or any other set of writings in place of the the Bible or adjunct to it, because one of their axioms is that there is no set of Holy Writings necessarily to figure out everything one needs to know about God. That violates the logic they use. One might hear a Mason or other Univeralists compare WHAT IS COMMON to all religions - ideas taught by Bible, Koran, Buddha, etc - but only as a means of "proving" one does not need any of them.

Are there any more modern denominations or post-Reformation denominations that the Masons started?  Well , Yeshua said "by their fruit, you shall know them" (Matt 7:16).  It is illogical for them to start a denomination that gets further away from their axioms, but it would be logical to start one that gets closer to those axioms.  For example, Christian Scientology discards the Bible, so it gets a step closer to Masonry in that regard, but takes a step away with their alien theology business.  Marcion tried to amputate large parts of the New Testament, but of course he was before their time.  But again, the point is that his theology is a step closer to Masonic axioms because it discards at least part of what you have to hold onto as a hurdle from their philosophy.

What the Masons WOULD NOT do is plot to start a denomination that ADDS to the complexity of theology by introducing new holy writings.  For example,

• Mormons believe in TWO Bibles, with the Book of Mormon adding to Scripture.  They also accept their own Church tradition.  So Mormons are farther away from the Sola Scriptura philosophy of Protestantism, and thus farther away from the starting point Masons like to get people.  Mormons also ban their members from joining the Masons.  Overall, Mormons have LOTS of weird ideas, but those ideas make Masonry harder to accept.  So its probably safe to say there was no Masonic plot to start the Mormons.
• Seventh Day Adventists.  Since they believe in MORE Holy Writings (anything Ellen White wrote), and the Sabbath - a practice that requires a literate beginning and a non-obvious count to seven, then it is probably safe to say that no, the Masons did not start this group, because it gets things farther away from their starting point to recruit people.  Also, as a woman, Ellen White could not have been a Mason since they don't accept women.

Masons probably would not start a cult based on a particular cult figure (Jim Jones, Moonies, etc) because again, that drives someone AWAY from their axioms.  Masons teach people can figure it all out from what is before them with no special help from a particular person or set of writings or tradition, and when you do, you'll conclude all religions have the same common elements that form that universal truth.  A cult figure goes in the opposite direction of being the ONLY person that can tell you THE WAY.

Masons are not the source of all evil.   Satan must use LOTS OF DIFFERENT FORMS OF ERROR to drag different people with different personalities into hell.  The cult figure approach works with some people, as long as that cult figure isn't pointing the way to Yeshua.  The universalist approach denies Yeshua is the only way.  That gets people from another angle.

Cults centerred around a particular person are another of Satan's deceptions.  Masons are not behind this, but you can bet the enemy is.

Cults have sprung up around various writings, including forged texts, which I believe the Book of Mormon was.  Cults have sprung up by embracing political causes, like how feminism has been used to drag women into goddess worship.  These are not Mason in nature because they take one away from the Masonic axioms they embrace.  But Satan will try ANY approach to get you into his clutches.  If one error does not work he will try another one.

I am not certain if they have ever started a denomination or not.  But they have tried working their way into the Church boards of established denominations and replacing the pastor with someone who can be subtle enough to preach just enough of the Gospel to stay in the pulpit but also plant a few seeds that would send people towards the 2 basic axioms that Masons try to use to trap people into their philosophy.

That is one of the biggest reasons why the house church movement is doing more to get people saved than the institutionalized Church.  It is easy for Satan to corrupt an institution.  It is much harder to corrupt a movement that stands on its own value.

Shalom,

Joe