How Did Change In Temple Ceremony Come About?

[LifeOnaPlate]

If the penalties in question were ever to be carried out on someone, I'm fairly confident they would behold them to be "violent".

Yup.

[Pahoran]

Does anyone else find this statement evasive?

What do you think I'm evading, Incredaboy?

Pahoran,

do you feel comfortable saying "Never any violent penalties" simply because we cannot discuss the specifics here?

No.

I feel comfortable saying this because no part of the Temple Ordinances were ever "violent" in any meaningful way.

Unless "cross my heart and hope to die" is somehow "violent."

I feel equally comfortable in saying that it is not.

Are you also attempting to slander anyone("since no honest person") who disagrees with you?

Not at all.

Many people honestly disagree with me about many things.

How do you ascertain the honesty of those you mentioned?

By virtue of the fact that the claim is untrue. Those repeating it either know that it is false, or else they care so little for the truth that they can't be bothered making sure that an accusation is true before they utter it.

Regards,

Pahoran

[maxrep12]

Pahoran,

the penalty was not some lighthearted childhood saying. It was both given and received in a sober and serious atmosphere. If you look further back in time into the temple endowment penalties, they become increasingly more graphic and violent in nature.

In our country, the making of threats can be actionable. One can find themselves incarcerated from the making of a threat, independent of it being carried out.

Many of us here, including myself, attended pre 1990. You can't make a reasonable case that the penalty did not have a violent consequence. It was not a cute couplet.

[Aquilifer]

In our country, the making of threats can be actionable. One can find themselves incarcerated from the making of a threat, independent of it being carried out.

Absolute horse hockey. The uttering of a threat must be coupled with an immediate, overt act to be actionable.

[juliann]

Oh for cryin' out loud, the covenant/curse formula has to be one of the most prevalent things in the Bible let alone the ANE. Heaven forbid that any temple ritual should reflect ancient practices. Get over it.

A Muslim scholar made a worthwhile observation about the reaction to his religion...Muslims had been reduced to the rituals they practiced. It is an easy way to marginalize any group.

[Phins]

I went through in the 70's a couple of times. The penalties sure seemed violent to me, though the actual wording made it seem silly to feel "threatened". It made me uncomfortable, because it was violent and very unexpected, but not really threatened.

[Calm]

Absolute horse hockey. The uttering of a threat must be coupled with an immediate, overt act to be actionable.

Also, isn't a threat something that someone makes against someone else, not something that a person makes for him or herself?

[maxrep12]

Absolute horse hockey. The uttering of a threat must be coupled with an immediate, overt act to be actionable.

Why don't you try making a threat the next time you are in an airport.

Back to the main point. Anyone can search the internet for the pre 1990 penalties. Simply stating that the penalties were NOT violent serves only to discredit the apologist. That position simply isn't defendable. Its not a matter of the interpretation of the beholder. This is not a question that has multiple correct answers, such as stating your favorite color.

The penalties were violent, and they were removed.

If you are up for some "Old Time Religion", perhaps we should reinstate the early 1900's penalties?

Pahoran,

as you are likely aware, this subject is being discussed over at "discussions". Come on over and visit, so we can be a bit more to the point with the subject matter.

[USU78]

One Element that I always failed to understand is why "secrecy" was associated with God's only true ceremony. I mean, you do not spread "the Gospel" with secrecy. You'd want everybody "know" and "partake" the blessings. I haven't received a single convincing answer so far. In a way it is like asking to a Born again to explain "Trinity".

I find the juxtaposition of the above with a sacred pueblo avatar quite telling. Our Hopi friends keep certain matters within the Kiva so that they are not profaned by just this kind of dragging-through-the-mud-ism. They are entitled to keep within the Kiva what ought to be kept within the Kiva. Do you question their right to do this? Do you accuse them of deflowering virgins on any altars therein? Do you accuse them of secretly plotting to take over the U.S., notwithstanding their sacred teachings include prophecies of the fall of western civilization?

Or does you bigotry extend only to Mormonism?

[Helorum]

Baurak Ale said: "Elijah the Prophet is responsible for giving the endowment to Joseph Smith, I wish I could find more out about this, as apparently he was the one that delivered this divine mystery to the prophet."

Where's your reference???

Don't bother looking -- it doesn' exist.

Elijah gave Joseph Smith the sealing POWER for living and proxy temple ordinances. Elijah did not give Joseph Smith the temple endowment ceremonies.

Everybody has had their say on a touchy topic. There is no point is arguing the same opinions over and over so thead closed.