Was Joseph Smith A Mason?

[Stone holm]

Do you have some references for that, that the endowment was given to Adam and Eve on leaving the Garden? I'm aware of the content within the endowment ceremony, but anything else outside that?

No references, thought I made it clear it was my belief. However, think about it, how could it not be the case. BTW Masons consider any opinion as to the existence of Freemasonry farther back than the onset of the Enlightenment to be what they call speculative Masonry, that means they neither assert it , nor deny it. But many believe, on their own, that it is ancient in origin. Having said that, in my own head, I view the Blue Lodge ceremonies to be to the Gospel like the OT is to the Gospel and the Temple to be to the Gospel like the fill Gospel as restored. Or like comparing Judaism to Christianity. Be that as it may, I believe it was a sort of preparatory thing like the Reformation was.

[AndyDnom]

My personal belief is that masonry was made up between 1100ad and 1600ad . It was made borrowing as much imagery from the ancient worlds of greece rome egypt, etc. they could find. Then Joseph Smith adapted some of that masonic ceremony and made up the endowment ceremony based on his beliefs about masonry and the scriptures, thinking that he was completing the corrupted for of masonry, into a perfected "celestial" form of masonry.

 

I find that explanation more likely than the one that Adam and Eve had it in the garden, and it was corrupted and spread to Egypt , etc. over time.

 

Belief in Adam and Eve having the ceremony requires a belief that Adam and Eve were real people that lived , and not metaphors and fables, which is what I think they are.

[Stone holm]

My personal belief is that masonry was made up between 1100ad and 1600ad . It was made borrowing as much imagery from the ancient worlds of greece rome egypt, etc. they could find. Then Joseph Smith adapted some of that masonic ceremony and made up the endowment ceremony based on his beliefs about masonry and the scriptures, thinking that he was completing the corrupted for of masonry, into a perfected "celestial" form of masonry.

 

I find that explanation more likely than the one that Adam and Eve had it in the garden, and it was corrupted and spread to Egypt , etc. over time.

 

Belief in Adam and Eve having the ceremony requires a belief that Adam and Eve were real people that lived , and not metaphors and fables, which is what I think they are.

 

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and many Christians would agree with you as well as many Masons.  I, however, disagree since I believe there was in fact one Adam and one Eve.  As to some of the creation story as recounted in Genesis, I would agree with you as it being a fable in the sense that Brigham Young said it was a fable -- but, like Brigham Young, I believe there was one Adam and one Eve.  That does not mean that I necessarily disbelieve or reject evolutionary theory, it is just that I believe that the Garden was a discrete place, not global in nature and that God especially "tweaked" Adam and Eve in a manner that made them different than what may have been going on outside the Garden, and that the descendants of Adam and Eve later probably interbred with some of the hominids that existed outside the Garden.  This is purely my personal speculation and belief, based on seeking to make doctrine and the scientific evidence consistent.  I do not find it particularly plausibe that the Masonic Blue Lodge rituals were simply made up -- but Freemasonry itself does not assert that it existed prior to the onset dates you indicate, so who am I to say.

[AndyDnom]

I was hurt when i found out the masonic link, because i had taken 20 religion credits at BYU, 3 temple prep classes, talked to my parents, read books, etc. before getting the endowment.

 

But i only used church approved sources, and never once did i read the word masonry.

 

Then when I joined a fraternity at my east coast undergrad school, boy was i surprised to hear 90% of the same stuff as the temple.

 

There is no excuse for this, why does the LDS inc. cause unescessary harm by not including masonry in their temple prep materials?

[halconero]

The temple ceremony regardless of if it's Mason influenced, is still very wonderful and I get a good feeling. I wonder if what we do in the temple, we have to do again to get into heaven.

 

The wording used in the ceremony tells us that something similar will occur in the future. Remember that right now we're just endowed to become something.

[halconero]

My personal belief is that masonry was made up between 1100ad and 1600ad . It was made borrowing as much imagery from the ancient worlds of greece rome egypt, etc. they could find. Then Joseph Smith adapted some of that masonic ceremony and made up the endowment ceremony based on his beliefs about masonry and the scriptures, thinking that he was completing the corrupted for of masonry, into a perfected "celestial" form of masonry.

 

I find that explanation more likely than the one that Adam and Eve had it in the garden, and it was corrupted and spread to Egypt , etc. over time.

 

Belief in Adam and Eve having the ceremony requires a belief that Adam and Eve were real people that lived , and not metaphors and fables, which is what I think they are.

 

It's difficult to tell. A medieval/renaissance origin is definitely possible, but there are ceremonies far more ancient that correlate a little too much to ignore.

 

On example is the Mandaeans in northern Iraq:

 

- Men are introduced to the priesthood via clasping the right hands, with their baptism and raised arm being the sign of their priesthood

 

- Clothed in robes, given a new "cosmic" name.

 

- Shown a drama depicting the creation of the world by the cosmic father and the cosmic mother, as well as the Fall of Adam and Even

 

- The initiate is crowned an anointed as king and priest to God, as was the "Celestial Adam"

 

(not related to the endowment but the same group also practices baptism for the dead)

[Stone holm]

I was hurt when i found out the masonic link, because i had taken 20 religion credits at BYU, 3 temple prep classes, talked to my parents, read books, etc. before getting the endowment.

 

But i only used church approved sources, and never once did i read the word masonry.

 

Then when I joined a fraternity at my east coast undergrad school, boy was i surprised to hear 90% of the same stuff as the temple.

 

There is no excuse for this, why does the LDS inc. cause unescessary harm by not including masonry in their temple prep materials?

 

Well you have to realize that there was a terrible rift between the Church and Freemasonry created at the time of Joseph and Hiram's martyrdom.  There is the question as to exactly what Joseph was doing at the window when he received the fatal volley, and there was a strong belief that the local Masons, against Masonic doctrine, helped hide members of the mob.  The two lodges which were dominated by Mormons had their charters jerked.  In addition, the Grand Council in Utah forbade lodges from inducting Mormons into membership -- which in addition violated Masonic doctrine and rules (that did not get changed until they made the mistake of refusing to allow the leader of the RLDS into a lodge meeting.  I agree that there probably should be more discussion, but it is a difficult thing because we hold some of the stuff sufficiently sacred that we really shouldn't discuss it outside the Temple.  It might make some sense, for their to be a little post endowment discussion with newly endowed members indicating to them the history of the endowment which might include some discussion of masonry and also a concise discussion of the changes which have been made.  That could take place somewhere in the Temple -- I don't see how it could be discussed appropriately outside the Temple.  Plus, because of the rift -- lots of Mormons know next to nothing about Masonry, and most Mason know next to nothing about Mormonism. 

[Damien the Leper]

Masonic symbolism is not worth taking seriously in a religious context. As a pseudo-pagan (if you really want to go that far) social and secret club for men with political and elitist ties then that might be more reasonable.

[Stargazer]

I'm struggling to find the quote, but Joseph Smith didn't claim to reveal a "right first time" endowment. He asked Brigham Young to keep working on it. It has evolved considerably over the last 200 years. I look forward to the next round of changes with interest.

 

The new film is really really good.  I was prepared not to like it, but it was great.

[Stone holm]

Masonic symbolism is not worth taking seriously in a religious context. As a pseudo-pagan (if you really want to go that far) social and secret club for men with political and elitist ties then that might be more reasonable.

 

Masonry does not purport to be a religion, it is an ethical society.  Like the Church it has separate societies primarily for women and youth: Eastern Star, Job's Daughters, and Demolay.  Labeling the Masonic Orders as "pseudo-pagan" displays gross ignorance, it is no more a "secret club for men with political and elitist ties" than the Church.

[Damien the Leper]

Read my post. I didn't claim a personal belief that it was religiously affiliated but I'm sure you weren't trying to say I did. I'm simply saying that it is my opinion that masonic 'rites' and symbolism have no place in Christianity.

[Stone holm]

Read my post. I didn't claim a personal belief that it was religiously affiliated but I'm sure you weren't trying to say I did. I'm simply saying that it is my opinion that masonic 'rites' and symbolism have no place in Christianity.

See no reason why not, but can't really explain without violating Board rules regarding Temple content.

[Damien the Leper]

See no reason why not, but can't really explain without violating Board rules regarding Temple content.

 

 

It should not be asserted that Masonic symbolism, pictures, etc are off limits simply because JS decided to borrow from them. That's just silly.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Valentinus

[Stone holm]

It should not be asserted that Masonic symbolism, pictures, etc are off limits simply because JS decided to borrow from them. That's just silly.

 

Why is it silly, if we consider them sacred?  The Jews left out the vowels in what they believed to be God's name in order to avoid saying the name, and many people believe that the true names of the Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedec Priesthood are hidden by the names of said personages for the same reason, is that just silliness as well?  But regardless of whether it is silly or not, if we indeed discussed them, the discussion would be deleted by the mods.

[Damien the Leper]

Why is it silly, if we consider them sacred?  The Jews left out the vowels in what they believed to be God's name in order to avoid saying the name, and many people believe that the true names of the Aaronic Priesthood and the Melchizedec Priesthood are hidden by the names of said personages for the same reason, is that just silliness as well?  But regardless of whether it is silly or not, if we indeed discussed them, the discussion would be deleted by the mods.

The burden of proof is an issue. Can Mormonism prove without a doubt that Jesus had absolutely anything to do with Masonic symbolism and rites? Speculation is unworthy of discussion where this is concerned. Either prove Masonic nonsense is absolutely connected to Jesus or retract such a claim.

[Stone holm]

The burden of proof is an issue. Can Mormonism prove without a doubt that Jesus had absolutely anything to do with Masonic symbolism and rites? Speculation is unworthy of discussion where this is concerned. Either prove Masonic nonsense is absolutely connected to Jesus or retract such a claim.

The Blue Lodge is more closely connected with the Old Testament, but their are references to the corner stone etc which are considered Christian. The Scottish Rite and York Rite are very closely tied to Christianity.

[canard78]

The wording used in the ceremony tells us that something similar will occur in the future. Remember that right now we're just endowed to become something.

Symbolism!

The more we try to take it literally and talk of similar future events, the more we move away from the opportunity to see lessons in the symbols.

It's a place of learning principles, not a dress-rehearsal. I don't think we're taught that there will be actual angels literally standing as sentinels taken waiting to test our knowledge. And I'm fully aware of what Brigham Young said.

[Damien the Leper]

The Blue Lodge is more closely connected with the Old Testament, but their are references to the corner stone etc which are considered Christian. The Scottish Rite and York Rite are very closely tied to Christianity.

 

Tied closely to...that is the operative phrase. Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus (especially him), first century Christianity and the Temple in Jerusalem then Masonry and all its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. Just because a Mason considers themself to be a Christian, even in Masonic origins (unless directly connected to Jesus Christ in the first century), does not give credence to Masonry as a Christian organization.

[Stone holm]

Tied closely to...that is the operative phrase. Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus (especially him), first century Christianity and the Temple in Jerusalem then Masonry and all its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. Just because a Mason considers themself to be a Christian, even in Masonic origins (unless directly connected to Jesus Christ in the first century), does not give credence to Masonry as a Christian organization.

 

I don't necessarily view them as a Christian organization -- but they certainly employ Christian and Temple symbolism in their rituals and rites.  Given your definition you would exclude most of Christianity from Christianity.

[Coreyb]

The burden of proof is an issue. Can Mormonism prove without a doubt that Jesus had absolutely anything to do with Masonic symbolism and rites? Speculation is unworthy of discussion where this is concerned. Either prove Masonic nonsense is absolutely connected to Jesus or retract such a claim.

Can Christianity prove without a doubt that Jesus had anything to with baptism, resurrection, or salvation through His blood? 

 

 

Tied closely to...that is the operative phrase. Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus (especially him), first century Christianity and the Temple in Jerusalem then Masonry and all its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. Just because a Mason considers themself to be a Christian, even in Masonic origins (unless directly connected to Jesus Christ in the first century), does not give credence to Masonry as a Christian organization.

Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus ( not Peter, Paul, Linus, Origen, or the Essenes), 21st century Christianity and all of its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. 

[Stone holm]

Can Christianity prove without a doubt that Jesus had anything to with baptism, resurrection, or salvation through His blood? 

 

 

Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus ( not Peter, Paul, Linus, Origen, or the Essenes), 21st century Christianity and all of its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. 

 

Not sure I understand the whole "direct connection" thingy,  very few Christian churches can actually prove such a thing -- we claim it, but much of Christianity does not believe our claims, just as we do not believe the claims of any other Christian Church.  LeGrand Richards in "A Marvelous Work and A Wonder" basically excluded all the Protestants from such a connection when he said its really just either us or the Catholics.  The higher degrees of Masonry specifically discuss Christian doctrine -- I would say that is pretty much all the connection you need.  And saying the Blue Lodge has no direct connection to Christianity is like saying the Old Testatment doesn't.  Not sure what is triggering the unnecessary harsh censure of the Masonic Orders, they certainly do not condemn any religion or any sect.

[Damien the Leper]

I don't necessarily view them as a Christian organization -- but they certainly employ Christian and Temple symbolism in their rituals and rites.  Given your definition you would exclude most of Christianity from Christianity.

 

No, Mormonism employs Masonic symbolism in its temples. The symbolism was Masonic before it was Mormon. Again, no. I'm not excluding most of Christianity. If I were to use the Mass as an example, the primary link is Real Presence Communion and the calling forth of the Spirit to transform the elements. Prior to the Eucharistic prayer, there are 2 readings (Old Testament and an Epistle), The Gospel, The Sermon, The Nicene Creed and The Confession of Sins. There is nothing pagan or non-Christian about these practices.

[Damien the Leper]

Can Christianity prove without a doubt that Jesus had anything to with baptism, resurrection, or salvation through His blood? 

 

Now you are calling into question the validity and sanctity of Christ's mission. If Jesus was not resurrected then we should burn all Christian houses of worship to the ground and convert to Judaism.

 

Unless a direct connection can be made to Jesus ( not Peter, Paul, Linus, Origen, or the Essenes), 21st century Christianity and all of its nonsense will forever be separate from Christianity. 

 

This is why Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Anglicanism and Moravianism will forever exist because of their links to the Eucharist and the apostolic succession that proceeded after the martyrdom of the original apostles.

[Damien the Leper]

Not sure I understand the whole "direct connection" thingy,  very few Christian churches can actually prove such a thing -- we claim it, but much of Christianity does not believe our claims, just as we do not believe the claims of any other Christian Church.  LeGrand Richards in "A Marvelous Work and A Wonder" basically excluded all the Protestants from such a connection when he said its really just either us or the Catholics.  The higher degrees of Masonry specifically discuss Christian doctrine -- I would say that is pretty much all the connection you need.  And saying the Blue Lodge has no direct connection to Christianity is like saying the Old Testatment doesn't.  Not sure what is triggering the unnecessary harsh censure of the Masonic Orders, they certainly do not condemn any religion or any sect.

 

I agree with Richards in his assessment. The Westminster brand of Calvinism is heretical while the Scottish Rite of Calvinism is much more in harmony with Orthodoxy. Personally, I don't much care for Calvinism at all. Calvin's work Institutes of the Christian Religion is awful. Mark Driscoll's book Doctrine is even worse. This Reformed and Acts 29 Reformed mess continues to undermine Orthodoxy. An example would be Pneumatic Presence Communion.

 

Is there concrete evidence to support the idea that Jesus practiced Masonic rituals or employed Masonic symbolism?

[Stone holm]

I agree with Richards in his assessment. The Westminster brand of Calvinism is heretical while the Scottish Rite of Calvinism is much more in harmony with Orthodoxy. Personally, I don't much care for Calvinism at all. Calvin's work Institutes of the Christian Religion is awful. Mark Driscoll's book Doctrine is even worse. This Reformed and Acts 29 Reformed mess continues to undermine Orthodoxy. An example would be Pneumatic Presence Communion.

 

Is there concrete evidence to support the idea that Jesus practiced Masonic rituals or employed Masonic symbolism?

Is there concrete evidence of what Christ actually did in the Temple, or in fact much of anything when it comes to Christ?