What Difference Does It Make If Non-Mormons Know The Secrets?

[Mars]

I agree with this. We probably also agree that being a mason of the 21st century (rather than the 19th) has its limitations too. In that sense, we are all standing on the sidelines.

That's been the curio of your paper, for me, thus far. It'd be real nice if we had a time machine...

[Mike Reed]

That's been the curio of your paper, for me, thus far. It'd be real nice if we had a time machine...

Wouldn't it?

"cuiro"... my word for the day. Thanks!

[rodheadlee]

Having Mormon temples is not a good work that would please God.

I'm sorry but they are not Mormon temples. They are Temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We do not worship Mormon.

http://lds.org/ensign/1993/03/in-his-holy-house?lang=eng&query=temples+church+jesus+christ+latter-day+saints+magazine

[Mike Reed]

I'm sorry but they are not Mormon temples. They are Temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We do not worship Mormon.

Unless, of course, when the Saints have assembled in a "Mormon Tabernacle," right?

Come on... Don't be petty.

I am sure Coolrock7 is well aware of the official name of the Church.

But I agree with you in rejecting Coolrock7's dogmatic condemnation that the temple ceremony isn't Christian... or that God wouldn't be pleased with the LDS temple ordinance.

[rodheadlee]

Unless, of course, when the Saints have assembled in a "Mormon Tabernacle," right?

Come on... Don't be petty.

I am sure Coolrock7 is well aware of the official name of the Church.

But I agree with you in rejecting Coolrock7's dogmatic condemnation that the temple ceremony isn't Christian... or that God wouldn't be pleased with the LDS temple ordinance.

It just gripes me when people don't want to acknowledge the fact that we worship Jesus Christ and our Heavenly Father through Him. Calling them Mormon Temples is just a way to cut us off from that recogntion.

[Mike Reed]

It just gripes me when people don't want to acknowledge the fact that we worship Jesus Christ and our Heavenly Father through Him. Calling them Mormon Temples is just a way to cut us off from that recogntion.

Ok. I am following what you were saying now. I can be little slow sometimes, sorry. By stressing the official name of the Church, you were pointing out that that Jesus Christ is in the name. Fair enough. Of course... there is probably nothing that can be said to convince Coolrock7 that Christianity is a much larger umbrella than he presumes... but you likely already know that. The good news is that most credible scholars acknowledge the Christianity of Mormonism--excuse me... The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Although Joseph Smith evidently was (as Coolrock7 notes) heavily influenced by Freemasonry as he developed the endowment, the narrative context in which he placed the ritual was inspired by a Masonic "Christianization" movement that had culminated in his day. Those who led this movement, such as Rev. Salem Town of New York or Rev. George Oliver of Europe, absolutely were Christian. So too was the Nauvoo endowment Christian.

[cinepro]

I'm sorry but they are not Mormon temples. They are Temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We do not worship Mormon.

http://lds.org/ensign/1993/03/in-his-holy-house?lang=eng&query=temples+church+jesus+christ+latter-day+saints+magazine

Why would someone assume that the name (or nickname) of a Church would necessarily indicate the object of its members' worship or share some critical piece of information about the Church members themselves? As far as I can tell, this isn't usually the case nor is it expected.

Unless you think this guy's a scientist...

[mfbukowski]

Although Joseph Smith evidently was (as Coolrock7 notes) heavily influenced by Freemasonry as he developed the endowment, the narrative context in which he placed the ritual was inspired by a Masonic "Christianization" movement that had culminated in his day. Those who led this movement, such as Rev. Salem Town of New York or Rev. George Oliver of Europe, absolutely were Christian. So too was the Nauvoo endowment.

Both those in favor of Masonry and those opposed acknowledge that the story of Hiram Abiff is a thinly veiled reference to the savior- those opposed see it the story as the story of the "antichrist", but any way you look at it the relationship between Masonry and a "Christian" context goes back a long way, and is abundantly documented.

Just to show how ubiquitous these references are, I googled "hiram abiff christ" and this is what I got- about 105,000 hits.

One might argue, with the volume of this kind of evidence, that links between Hiram and Christ are so obvious that such a movement was simply giving voice to what had been only thinly veiled in Masonry from the beginning.

For me the question is more how uniquely "LDS" the context is, including theosis or exaltation and symbology consistent with an LDS world view I am just not sure that generic "Christian" parallels show much of anything.

[rodheadlee]

Why would someone assume that the name (or nickname) of a Church would necessarily indicate the object of its members' worship or share some critical piece of information about the Church members themselves? As far as I can tell, this isn't usually the case nor is it expected.

Unless you think this guy's a scientist...

D&C 18:21 Take upon you the name of Christ, and speak the truth in soberness.

D&C 20:37 And again, by way of commandment to the church concerning the manner of baptism—All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins, and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall be received by baptism into his church.

There are many more instances where we are commanded to take up His name. But setting that aside you would be amazed at what some people think about Mormons, about what our religion is about. These would people that have had no contact with the Church or it's members, zero contact. I had no clue what a Mormon was until, as a young adult, I went to the World's Fair in Spokane and visited the LDS exhibit. I was floored, I had no idea. I grew up in So Cal so it's not like I grew up on a deserted island.

In Coolrok's instance he was just denying that we worship Jesus Christ.

[coolrok7]

My opening comment which I didn’t make until p. 5 of the thread after a lot of discussion had already taken place:

As was stated already, Mormons have been instructed in the idea that idea of “sacred”, in reference to the covenants they’ve made, is not to be talked about outside the walls of their temple. I acknowledge that is their view. This instruction initially comes from Masonic ritual where this very thing is presented in a ritually graphical way (outsiders are not under such Biblical obligation to not talk about amongst those not Mormon).

Not wanting to disregard a temple Mormon’s sensibilities, I would not expect for them to discuss things they are obligated to not talk about nor would I try to get them to.

Masonic ritual is based on using as part of the furniture in their ritual the “holy” books of the various religious belief systems. The denial that it is a religion I don’t buy.

When a Mason is buried they are in their white aprons (Mormons of a different color and which represents something else) which is representing their “good works” wherein they are supposedly welcomed into eternity which is supposed to get them into heaven (with God)

I’m born a sinner as everyone else but like those of like faith (Peter) I’m saved by grace through faith, not of works although works are a product of faith (Paul).

The Gospel is the Good News that Jesus accomplished mine, and everyone of Biblical faith, salvation on the cross and rose from the dead after the third day to prove it:

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)

I’m not denigrating the individual faith of those who are Mormon (LDS, Latter-day Saints, members of the church, etc.) or Masons for that matter as they have the right to believe what they choose to.

I don’t believe it though based on what I already believed before I knew anything of Mormonism, after having been told By Jehovah’s Witnesses where I lived in the early 60’s that what I believed was false (no different from what Mormons say as I found out later):

Following the death of the apostles, revelation ceased. The authority of God was no longer among men. Christianity sickened and died. In time, a new religion grew up in its place—a religion that professed to be Jesus Christ’s Church, but which in reality was a conglomerate of pagan worship and Greek philosophy, “having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.”. . .that eventually led to the complete apostasy of the true church and the eventual creation of an apostate religion that has been responsible for the extermination of the Messiah’s true followers and the persecution of his chosen people, the Jews. . . . (APOSTASY AND RESTORATION pamphlet, p.9)

TEACHING THE INVESTIGATOR- Our hope in teaching the Gospel is to convert people and baptize them. . . . (p.3)

9. There was a complete apostasy and my church

is false. (A UNIFORM SYSTEM FOR TEACHING INVESTIGATORS (August 1961)

Now, at the present time, the true Christian congregation has been recovered from the apostasy that enshrouded the Middle Ages in spiritual darkness. Just as Israel was returned to its land in 537 B.C.E. by King Cyrus of Persia, so Jehovah has used his reigning King Jesus Christ to bring the modern-day Christian congregation into a spiritually prosperous condition. (Isa. 1:25-27) The true doctrines have been restored concerning God’s name, the position of his Son Jesus Christ, the kingdom of God, the ransom, resurrection, and others. The false doctrines of Trinity, hellfire, immortality of the human soul and others have been exposed as unscriptural. The preaching of the good news of the Kingdom is being done world wide. . . .As to knowledge, God has provided his entire Word, which today can be possessed in printed form by the most humble person. Its use can make the man of God fully competent, completely equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16, 17) (The Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1971, p.503)

I’m pointing out distinctions in history from my perspective that I believe bears out my conclusions so far.

I believe it is a Christian heretical movement that came out of the restorationism of the early 1800’s, also with the name of the Church of Christ. Witnesses (Dawn Bible students originally) came along a little later in the same century.

In regards to, “Mormon temple” (there are such things as Mormon temples or temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) and the correct name of the Mormon Church (a nickname), early on in their history, Latter-day Saints began to be referred to as “Mormons” (there have been three Different names for the Church; initially called the “Church of Christ”):

I would like to speak of the institution. . .The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, sometimes known as the Mormon Church. That is not the Church’s correct name; it is only a nickname derived from our belief in the Book of Mormon, . . .—Elder Russell M. Nelson (AN APOSTLE’S TESTIMONY pamphlet, p.2)

the name of the Church on the title pages of the first three printings of the revelations: “The Church of Christ- (Book of Commandments) 1833, “The Church of the Latter-day Saints” (Doctrine and Covenants, 1835), and “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” (Doctrine and Covenants, 1844).” (The Ensign, January 1979, p.13)

Note this “MORMON CHURCH” advertisement from a past Reader’s Digest (from last page of an insert about “Mormon Missionaries” entitled, “When You Open the Door”):

FREE 150-page BOOK answers more questions about Mormons than any other book we could send you.

clip, fill-in, mail this coupon to:

MORMON CHURCH

P.O. Box 30700, Salt Lake City, Utah 84150

shows picture of book here-

Please check one or more boxes below

Please send me the

FREE BOOK “A Marvelous

Work and a Wonder”

OR CALL TOLL FREE

1-800-331-1750

and ask for “A Marvelous Work and a Wonder”

I would like to talk with Mormon Missionaries

(NOTE: No one will visit unless you check here.)

My phone__________________

(personal Address information here)

LDS 1980”

A Missionary Church

This explains why The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must, of necessity, be a missionary church and why our missionaries take their message to other Christians, even though they are often criticized for so doing with the query, “why do you not go to the heathens? We already have Christianity.” The answer must obviously be: “Because we believe in a restored, revealed religion and church.” (A MARVELOUS WORK and a WONDER, LeGrand Richards, p.2)

(rodheadlee)

. . .There are many more instances where we are commanded to take up His name. But setting that aside you would be amazed at what some people think about Mormons, about what our religion is about. These would people that have had no contact with the Church or it's members, zero contact. I had no clue what a Mormon was until, as a young adult, I went to the World's Fair in Spokane and visited the LDS exhibit. I was floored, I had no idea. I grew up in So Cal so it's not like I grew up on a deserted island.

In Coolrok's instance he was just denying that we worship Jesus Christ.

(Mike Reed)

Unless, of course, when the Saints have assembled in a "Mormon Tabernacle," right?

Come on...Don't be petty.

I am sure Coolrock7 is well aware of the official name of the Church.

I’ve never denied that they “worship Jesus Christ”. In my instance Paul made the original argument of which I’ve repeated numerous times both here and over at ZLMB:

For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. (2 Corinthians 11:4)

I was pointing out in reference to the thread op that Masonic ritual directly influenced Joseph Smith. Masonry is not Christian but is a belief system (religious none the less). Mormonism I believe follows in the same footsteps, especially in their temple ritual/ordinances.

[Jeff K.]

I was pointing out in reference to the thread op that Masonic ritual directly influenced Joseph Smith. Masonry is not Christian but is a belief system (religious none the less). Mormonism I believe follows in the same footsteps, especially in their temple ritual/ordinances.

Masonry is not a religion so much as a philosophy upon how to approach life. You can ask the Baptist masons I know and they will tell you the same, as well as Masons from our church, and others. Your knowledge and your context of the approach masons take is flawed.

[mfbukowski]

Well... with all due respect, Mike Homer didn't think I was merely shouting from the sidelines at MHA; neither did Clinton Bartholomew.

But I will grant you that it is more difficult for a non-Mason or non-Mormon to write on this topic. I also will say that if one chooses to write on the topic, it is wise to consult people who are members of these organizations.

It would be interesting to hear from Kerry Shirts on all of this, since he is now both a faithful LDS and a Mason, and well versed in the "lore" of each.

[Mars]

I'm tellin' ya, coolrok, that the idea that Masonry is a religion is baloney.

When a Mason "dies" and is then "raised," it's symbolic of the former self dying and the regeneration of a new man in Masonry. It's symbolic of what Masonry does for the member of the craft, and its goal is not to foreshadow the Savior's death and resurrection, nor is it to say that salvation lies in the principles of Masonry. You would have to argue that Masonry's genesis saw it the way you assert, or that a large group of Masons practice(d) it that way, providing research and commentary from leading Masonic authorities before I'd agree with you.

As for the apron, it symbolizes your pure actions, and that when you meet your creator, naked and alone, your own good works and actions of charity may clothe you and attest to your good life.

Now I admit that there may be Masons or even groups of Masons who see things the way you do, or have in the past (thinking of Mike Reed's paper), but today, most definitely in the jurisdiction of Utah (where the overwhelming majority of Masons are not Mormon, I might add), it is not seen that way.

[Mars]

I might also add that the reason for the death of the candidate is *NOT* one of Messianic sacrifice. There's no death that others may live. There's no promise of eternal life after that symbolic death. The symbolic death in Masonry has to do with keeping your word, and being true to your brethren. It's more a story of betrayal and integrity than it is a type of Christ.

[coolrok7]

(coolrok7)

I was pointing out in reference to the thread op that Masonic ritual directly influenced Joseph Smith. Masonry is not Christian but is a belief system (religious none the less). Mormonism I believe follows in the same footsteps, especially in their temple ritual/ordinances.

(JeffK.)

Masonry is not a religion so much as a philosophy upon how to approach life. You can ask the Baptist masons I know and they will tell you the same, as well as Masons from our church, and others. Your knowledge and your context of the approach masons take is flawed.

Most belief systems (even athiesm which is a denial of God existing) have a particular philosophy in mind when it comes to how to approach living ones life.

Religious belief usually has to do with belief in God, a god, or gods depending on who one asks. Religious belief systems usually have at its head of an organization an authority like a prophet or something to that effect and a particular set of writings as “Scripture”.

Masonry although it denies it’s a religion has reference to the Grand Architect of the Universe (God) or something to that effect. It goes with the territory that Masons deny being a religion.

It would be in reference to a holy book of the various belief systems. These are tied into belief in God. This is where the religion comes into play whether they deny it or not (these belief systems are incompatible with a professing Christian with belief in Jesus Christ as “the way, the truth and the life”):

. . .The Supreme Being and the Volume of Sacred Law

Candidates for regular Freemasonry are required to declare a belief in a Supreme Being. However, the candidate is not asked to expand on, or explain, his interpretation of Supreme Being. The discussion of politics and religion is forbidden within a Masonic Lodge, in part so a Mason will not be placed in the situation of having to justify his personal interpretation. Thus, reference to the Supreme Being can mean the Christian Trinity to a Christian Mason, Allah to a Muslim Mason, Para Brahman to a Hindu Mason, etc. While most Freemasons would take the view that the term Supreme Being equates to God, others may hold a more complex or philosophical interpretation of the term.

In the ritual, the Supreme Being is referred to as the Great Architect of the Universe, which alludes to the use of architectural symbolism within Freemasonry.

A Volume of the Sacred Law is always displayed in an open Lodge in those jurisdictions which require a belief in the Supreme Being. In English-speaking countries, this is frequently the King James Version of the Bible or another standard translation; there is no such thing as an exclusive "Masonic Bible". Furthermore, a candidate is given his choice of religious text for his Obligation, according to his beliefs. UGLE alludes to similarities to legal practice in the UK, and to a common source with other oath taking processes. In Lodges with a membership of mixed religions it is common to find more than one sacred text displayed. In lodges that follow the Continental tradition other texts may be used, including texts that are non-religious in nature. . . .(Wikepedia)

Most if not all major denominations has some kind of restriction in being Masons while at the same time a member of the church organization.

Other denominations don’t have this restriction in which I would strongly disagree but that is their prerogative to do so (but will have to give account for it at Judgment Day I believe). There is a Biblical command to not be deceived. Not everyone claiming to be Christian are.

[Vance]

Religious belief usually has to do with belief in God, a god, or gods depending on who one asks. Religious belief systems usually have at its head of an organization an authority like a prophet or something to that effect and a particular set of writings as “Scripture”.

So, the Boy Scouts of America is a religious system?

"On my honor, I will do my best

To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;

To help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight."

There is the National Council for the organization.

And they have a Handbook (scripture).

[mfbukowski]

So, the Boy Scouts of America is a religious system?

"On my honor, I will do my best

To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;

To help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight."

There is the National Council for the organization.

And they have a Handbook (scripture).

Also, clearly they are tools of the Antichrist since they also have Masonic practices like having their own signs, salutes and handshakes!

http://www.google.com/search?q=scout+sign+salute+and+handshake&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[Vance]

Also, clearly they are tools of the Antichrist since they also have Masonic practices like having their own signs, salutes and handshakes!

http://www.google.com/search?q=scout+sign+salute+and+handshake&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Oh my, it is worse than I thought.

[mfbukowski]

I might also add that the reason for the death of the candidate is *NOT* one of Messianic sacrifice. There's no death that others may live. There's no promise of eternal life after that symbolic death. The symbolic death in Masonry has to do with keeping your word, and being true to your brethren. It's more a story of betrayal and integrity than it is a type of Christ.

So you think that the generally accepted symbolic interpretations of parallels between Hiram Abiff and Christ are ill-founded?

(Link in post 133)

[mfbukowski]

As a follow up, I will post this from a random site I selected; these sort of explanations are everywhere on the net, this particular site is a Christian anti-Masonic site:

Hiram Abiff in Masonic Ritual

During the Legend of the Third Degree, the candidate portrays Hiram Abiff in the ritual. He is blindfolded and led through the ritual by a conductor. In Masonic ritual, Hiram Abiff is not a worker of brass as in Scripture, but rather the Grand Master at the building of Solomon�s temple. Each day, he lays out the work for the workmen to complete. There are Fellowcrafts who work on the temple who are to be given the secrets of a Master Mason as compensation - when the temple is completed. Once they have the secrets of a Master Mason they will earn the wages of a Master. A group of fifteen Fellowcrafts decide that they do not want to wait until the work is completed. They form a plot which only three of them carry through. The three "ruffians" sequentially accost Hiram at the East gate, the South gate and the West gate. A similar dialog occurs at each temple entrance. The ruffian demands the secrets of a Master Mason. Hiram explains that this is neither the time, nor the place; the secrets can only be revealed in the presence of three, King Solomon, Hiram the King of Tyre and myself. The ruffian demands, "Your life, or the secrets." Hiram responds, "My life you can have, my integrity - never." When they fail to get what they want, they strike Hiram with one of the working tools and he staggers to the next gate and the next encounter. The third ruffian is also unable to extract the secrets from Hiram Abiff. He strikes Hiram on the head with a setting maul and kills him. Hiram willingly laid down his life rather than betray his trust.

The ruffians have not achieved their goal and they have a body to dispose of. They bury the body in temple rubble and plan to return at midnight to give the body a more decent burial. At midnight, they return and carry the body to a hill west of Mt. Moriah, where Hiram Abiff is reburied. The next day, Hiram is nowhere to be found. A search is conducted. The Fellowcrafts who did not go through with the conspiracy confess the plot. A grave is found; the body of Hiram is found within it. Hiram Abiff has been in the grave for 15 days. King Solomon gives the order for the body to be raised using the grips of the Entered Apprentice and then the Fellowcraft. Those efforts are unsuccessful. King Solomon states that he fears that with the death of Hiram Abiff the word of a Master Mason has been lost. Therefore, the first word spoken after Hiram is raised from the grave will be the substitute until the lost word can be recovered. At that point, King Solomon raises Hiram Abiff from "a dead level to a living perpendicular" using the real grip of a Master Mason, also known as the Lion�s Paw. He embraces Hiram on the five points of fellowship, standing foot to foot, knee to knee, breast to breast, hand to back and mouth to ear. King Solomon, played by the Worshipful Master, then whispers the substitute for the lost word in Hiram�s ear. That word is Ma-Ha-Bone. Following the Master Mason Lecture, the following words are spoken:

Then, finally my brethren, let us imitate our Grand Master, Hiram Abiff, in his virtuous conduct, his unfeigned piety to God, and his inflexible fidelity to his trust; that, like him, we may welcome the grim tyrant, Death, and receive him as a kind messenger sent by our Supreme Grand Master, to translate us from this imperfect to that all-perfect, glorious, and celestial Lodge above, where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides.

When this conclusion to the ritual is reread carefully, breaking it down phrase by phrase, it is easy to see that what it actually says is that, "Masonic brethren should imitate Hiram Abif to get into heaven." Notice that Freemasonry does not urge Freemasons to have faith in Hiram Abiff. When the words from the ritual are analyzed carefully, it is clear that Freemasonry is substituting imitation for faith and Hiram for Jesus - as the means to gaining entry into heaven, following death.

[Mars]

So you think that the generally accepted symbolic interpretations of parallels between Hiram Abiff and Christ are ill-founded?

(Link in post 133)

~squirms about being put on the spot~

From what I've understood of the ritual up to this point, I don't think that's the point or context of Masonry. If it is, I haven't picked up on that and it certainly isn't/hasn't been taught to me that way. Nor do you find the death of Hiram Abiff allowing others to live, in the way that the Lord's death broke the bonds of death and brought about a resurrection. The candidate certainly 'dies,' and is then 'raised,' but that's where the similarities go out of sync. There is no sacrificial or salvation oriented purpose to Hiram Abiff's death. It's also contrary to the principles of Masonry, specifically the attempt to be a non-religious fraternity. I can think of many Masons I've met in Utah who would agree with me.

Where did Masonry originate? No one really knows. The earliest traceable and concrete records we have of justly constituted Masonic authority originate in England, Scotland, and Ireland. The Grand Lodges of those three countries represent the Masonic authority even above state Grand Lodges for America. If at any time some justly constituted Masonic authority felt that the Hiram Abiff story was a parallel or type of Christ, I haven't picked up on it.

As a final note, I would mention that the first half a dozen or so links that pertained to Hiram Abiff as Jesus Christ were overly-hyped parallels made by websites who feel that Masonry attempts to substitute the Savior's role for that of Hiram Abiff's.

[Mars]

As a follow up, I will post this from a random site I selected; these sort of explanations are everywhere on the net, this particular site is a Christian anti-Masonic site:

~snip~

I read through that one. I think they've got a few things wrong. Some are minor tidbits (Hiram Abiff was not the Grand Master, King Solomon was), and the word they give is also wrong.

I think they seriously draw the wrong conclusion about the example of Hiram Abiff's life. For example:

When the words from the ritual are analyzed carefully, it is clear that Freemasonry is substituting imitation for faith and Hiram for Jesus - as the means to gaining entry into heaven, following death.

I think they're reaching here. A Mason attempts to govern himself according to what everyone feels are just and virtuous principles, namely integrity, honesty, courage, respect, and such, and Hiram Abiff's death exemplified this. The idea is that living a just and upright life will leave you with nothing to hide once you get to Heaven and account yourself before your Maker.

Nowhere in Blue Lodge (1st three degrees only) Masonry does there exist the idea of repentance, nor the idea of forgiveness for transgression at the feet of Almighty God. There is, however, the metaphor between building a life of a man with right pieces and building a Lodge or King Solomon's Temple with the right foundational stones and supporting columns. The more true and accurate each stone, the more plomb and straight each pillar, the more strong and steadfast the edifice. Likewise, a man who builds his life using the metaphorical stones and pillars of the sublime principles of Freemasonry may become a strong and steadfast man.

[mfbukowski]

I think as LDS we need to have a clearer understanding of all these parallels -

I liken Joseph's inspired revelation of the endowment to be in many ways like the Book of Abraham- since I accept a "catalyst" theory of translation there; to me, clearly Masonry was the "catalyst" for the revelation of the endowment.

The mere fact that the endowment has been changed during our and other's lifetimes many times since Joseph indicates to me that the words and phrases in themselves are not to be taken as "magic incantations" which is unfortunately what many members do- in other words, their literal, direct expression carries little spiritual value- what is important is the meaning and the spirit of the revelations, and the opportunities which these wonderful ceremonies give for greater communion with our Father and the savior.

I think their ancient origin is clear even if it cannot be directly proven historically at this time, and I think we must acknowledge and embrace that indeed Masonry has "Christian" roots so it is not surprising that Joseph's restoration of those roots in the endowment has parallels in Masonry.

Which "came first" cannot be proven, nor is it relevant as far as I am concerned; what IS important is that we look at the endowment with spiritual eyes, and begin to see it for the "university of the spirit" which it is!

[Mars]

I think that's fair, mfbukowski. Whatever the origins of Freemasonry are, whatever was practiced at the time of Joseph Smith in New England, today's context of Freemasonry does not embody Christianity nor religion.

Otherwise there are going to be a lot of surprised and offended Masons.

[mfbukowski]

~squirms about being put on the spot~

Lol! I only picked on you because I knew you could handle it!- and of course you did!

From what I've understood of the ritual up to this point, I don't think that's the point or context of Masonry. If it is, I haven't picked up on that and it certainly isn't/hasn't been taught to me that way. Nor do you find the death of Hiram Abiff allowing others to live, in the way that the Lord's death broke the bonds of death and brought about a resurrection. The candidate certainly 'dies,' and is then 'raised,' but that's where the similarities go out of sync. There is no sacrificial or salvation oriented purpose to Hiram Abiff's death. It's also contrary to the principles of Masonry, specifically the attempt to be a non-religious fraternity. I can think of many Masons I've met in Utah who would agree with me.

Yes, this seems to be the prevailing view from everyone I know who is both Mormon and a Mason, and this view is reflected in many apologetic approaches to this.

Where did Masonry originate? No one really knows. The earliest traceable and concrete records we have of justly constituted Masonic authority originate in England, Scotland, and Ireland. The Grand Lodges of those three countries represent the Masonic authority even above state Grand Lodges for America. If at any time some justly constituted Masonic authority felt that the Hiram Abiff story was a parallel or type of Christ, I haven't picked up on it.

Interesting- yet it is so widely quoted as being such. But clearly I think you point out major differences, and I agree with you on that.

As a final note, I would mention that the first half a dozen or so links that pertained to Hiram Abiff as Jesus Christ were overly-hyped parallels made by websites who feel that Masonry attempts to substitute the Savior's role for that of Hiram Abiff's.

I agree