Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

JLHPROF

Contributor
  • Posts

    16,724
  • Joined

  • Last visited

5 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Happy Valley (by way of the UK and Canada).
  • Interests
    Church history, doctrine, temples, priesthood, and all things pertinent to the eternities.

Recent Profile Visitors

10,888 profile views

JLHPROF's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Conversation Starter
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

12.6k

Reputation

  1. Well I haven't watched the video but usual claim is that all hat accounts come from critics (antis, ex members etc). Same with all the claims Joseph or his family practiced folk magic. These types don't accept anything remotely less than divine.
  2. It's another new trend. I ran into a guy on TikTok pushing these ideas and when I pushed back he blocked me. It's related to the Stoddard's and their Joseph Smith foundation who'd rather see a return to the sanitzed history of the 50s & 60s (& think the Bushman "progmo's" are out to destroy testimonies). Not quite as bad as the decanonize D&C 132 crowd that think Joseph was a monogamist but still more interested in faith promotion than actual history.
  3. I used to post a lot more when the majority of threads and topics were about doctrine and history. I post far less now that most posts are about Church culture and Church politics and who is suing the Church or saying things on social media.
  4. Why did the Kirtland temple not have family sealings, baptisms for the dead or a Celestial Room? Joseph hadn't been shown it all yet. In 1842 the first endowments were in the Red Brick store attic with curtains. He knew how things were supposed to be but not how to set them up. I'm sure the garments were just as improvised in the Red Brick Store endowment. He was given the garment design by heavenly messenger but he still needed seamstresses to figure out some details for assembly. He was given to know about plural marriage before the sealing keys were even restored so we get the Fanny Alger situation.
  5. I believe that was the intended original design as Joseph began restoring the temple ordinances. Bottom line is this - the original garment symbolized the entire plan of salvation. Collar - removed Strings - removed Split bosom - removed Covering - just barely, less each year Small changes to markings format and location. Seams - more added (Joseph taught there should be as few as possible) All the associated symbolism of these elements is virtually lost to the ages in the Church today. And just like the endowment nobody cares anymore. Matt 22:11-14
  6. No, I'm speaking of the "old" garment used from 1842-abt 1922, and then almost exclusively in the temple until about 1975. And the modern version can't because there isn't anything remaining of those symbols to represent anything.
  7. The garment wasn't originally pants. The very first two part version (1842 based on one Hyrum had) was replaced almost immediately (1842-43) by the union suit held by strings even before the martyrdom. It was split top to bottom down the bosom and usually held by strings that represented certain things - things that perfectly fit the idea of connecting two sides of the veil.
  8. The garment used to symbolize the entire plan of salvation. Our creation/birth, our fallen mortal nature, our redemption in Christ, the restoration of our ability to part the veil and enter his presence, and our future eternal lives and exaltation. All of it. Just like the endowment did. Eternal families and the sealing link, priesthood, the godhead, the parting of the veil and the removal of the barrier between men and God, and since all of those principles connect to the Savior it also directly represented the Savior. What remains is a nice reminder of covenants we made but diminished in every other way.
  9. I could write an entire paper walking people through the scriptures and principles behind this step by step but I won't. This isn't some random theory, it's literally the plan of salvation exactly as we've been taught in Sunday School. But you have to see the connections. First you have to recognize the connection between the temples (which teach the plan) and our mortal life/body. Look how many scriptures compare our bodies to temples, mostly in the Savior's teachings. Then see the similarities between them in scriptures. In the case of the garment it is specifically connected to the veil and EVERYTHING that entails. (Endowed members should be very aware of that the veil of the temple and the garment are connected). Take the original garment design, compare it to JS History 1:31 and Luke 23:45. Understand that the veil of forgetfulness placed on Adam and Eve as well as the veil we use to describe the separation between us and God when fallen is parted by Christ. Just as in the temple. Just as the garment provides the separation between the fallen world and the cleansed person after the initiatories. The plan of salvation (fall to exaltation). The temple endowment from creation to exaltation. Our mortal lives from creation to fall to passing through the veil. The original garment represents the entire process, its original design and symbols included the whole plan from beginning to end. There is a wonderful quote from Pres. John Taylor that I won't post but even Wikipedia has it. You just have to see the connections.
  10. Joseph Smith History 1:31 He had on a loose robe of most exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen; nor do I believe that any earthly thing could be made to appear so exceedingly white and brilliant. His hands were naked, and his arms also, a little above the wrist; so, also, were his feet naked, as were his legs, a little above the ankles. His head and neck were also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this robe, as it was open, so that I could see into his bosom. Luke 24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: D&C 133:46 And it shall be said: Who is this that cometh down from God in heaven with dyed garments; yea, from the regions which are not known, clothed in his glorious apparel, traveling in the greatness of his strength? Revelation 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled 3 Nephi 11:8 And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an angel that had appeared unto them.
  11. It's not meant to cover just for modesty. It's meant to represent several things scripturally that it no longer does (and in may cases hasn't for years). It has far more significance than is EVER discussed anymore so it makes perfect sense that nobody would care about additional changes. 95% of endowed members would have no idea anyway. Nobody knows so nobody cares. 🤷🏻
  12. At this point they might as well replace them with phylacteries or rosary beads or some other "symbolic reminder" of covenants because the garment of the holy priesthood is long gone. It no longer has the same symbolism in its overall design.
  13. But we never change the covenants right? It's just presentation. How, as Joseph so clearly explained, are people saved on the same principles if they aren't even under the same covenants?
  14. We've circled back around 🙄. Joseph Smith, the Prophet that was given the endowment by revelation, taught specifically that the ordinances were never to be altered or changed. He gave Brigham charge to arrange the presentation and organization of the elements of the ordinance but eternal ordinances don't change. Period. If we change them they're no longer effectual, valid, or binding.
×
×
  • Create New...