>>40745565
>and make the thread his too.
This is literally just your own pathology that causes you to be so hostile.

>There have been posts in this general describing just that
Wow. I'm sure there have been.

>Note he's the one who brought them up for no reason
You literally brought up "deism". A "religion" with no holy texts or other trappings, which only ever had historical relevance as "the thing that the founding fathers said they were" because that was how they explained being masons.

Why are you shitting on historical practitioners, btw? You're usually the one who's ALL ABOUT orthodoxy and credibility?
Gonna have to start diagnosing people with Mine Derangement Syndrome...