Lds Temple Teachings

[cdowis]

I thought that members of the church developed in spiritual maturity over the years, do not need to be spoon fed on every issue, understand that the scriptures often use analogies and various expressions to teach doctrines.

 

Then I discovered that many members do not study and contemplate on the scriptures and seek guidance thru the Holy Ghost.  Going to the temple is done a couple times a year. Their ignorance is deep and profound, and they blame the church for their ignorance.

 

How disappointing.

[thesometimesaint]

I thought that members of the church developed in spiritual maturity over the years, do not need to be spoon fed on every issue, understand that the scriptures often use analogies and various expressions to teach doctrines.

 

Then I discovered that many members do not study and contemplate on the scriptures and seek guidance thru the Holy Ghost.  Going to the temple is done a couple times a year. Their ignorance is deep and profound, and they blame the church for their ignorance.

 

How disappointing.

 

Disappointing, and disturbing. Sometimes I am grateful that we can't be damned in ignorance. We either learn it here or we learn in the next life.

[Tacenda]

I'd say that the truths taught in scripture and by the drama in the endowment are beautiful. They teach a number of things.

 

1) As we are all Adams and all Eves we have our own personal fall. 

 

2) The sacrifice of Jesus on our behalf is what redeems us

 

3) Satan's plans will be frustrated and combatted through Christ.

 

4) Prophets and Apostles function to point us to Christ.

 

5) Physical reminders can aid us in remembering the Atonement of Christ. Ordinances in the endowment are meant to remind us of the crucifixion of Christ

 

6) Women and Men aid each other in coming to Christ

For such a young man, you're very wise!   I'm not only addressing this post, though good. 

[Tacenda]

Another post brought back to life because I can't start topics.   I just read on another board, a rumor.  It was that come September they will allow 18 yr. olds to take out their endowments.  Wow!  But how accurate, we won't know until then unless anyone here has heard or are aware of it. 

[Kenngo1969]

For such a young man, you're very wise!   I'm not only addressing this post, though good. 

He's My Young Padawan!  Taught him everything he knows.  (J/K ... )

[Kenngo1969]

Another post brought back to life because I can't start topics.   I just read on another board, a rumor.  It was that come September they will allow 18 yr. olds to take out their endowments.  Wow!  But how accurate, we won't know until then unless anyone here has heard or are aware of it. 

Pssssst!  The conspiratorialists are a day late and a dollar short on that one!  We've been sending 18-year-olds on missions for over a year now.  It would only stand to reason that they receive their Endowments before they go!

[USU78]

Pssssst!  The conspiratorialists are a day late and a dollar short on that one!  We've been sending 18-year-olds on missions for over a year now.  It would only stand to reason that they receive their Endowments before they go!

 

They were endowing soldiers before sending them off to fight in WWII:  not all, but a sizable number.

[Tacenda]

Pssssst!  The conspiratorialists are a day late and a dollar short on that one!  We've been sending 18-year-olds on missions for over a year now.  It would only stand to reason that they receive their Endowments before they go!

This is for non missionaries also.  But definitely must be worthy, I'm sure. 

[thesometimesaint]

This is for non missionaries also.  But definitely must be worthy, I'm sure. 

 

Technically there is nothing stopping us from having any one of any age from going through for their own Endowments. Though 18 seems about right for sufficient maturity to understand the significance of them. I joined at age 20 so it was beside the point.

[halconero]

I'm currently studying my way through the New Oxford Annotated Bible (throwing in Joseph Smith Translation where applicable) as well as using a couple commentaries while perusing and it turns out that the Garden of Eden was considered a model temple for the ancient Israelites. This adds another layer of symbolism when we consider the covenants, events, and doctrines surrounding Eden.

 

By the way, thank you Tacenda.

[JLHPROF]

Technically there is nothing stopping us from having any one of any age from going through for their own Endowments. Though 18 seems about right for sufficient maturity to understand the significance of them. I joined at age 20 so it was beside the point.

 

If you read the temple records from the Nauvoo Temple (and I would assume St. George, Manti, & Logan), the endowment was given to many teenagers (under 18) in the 1800's.  There is record after record of as young as 13 & 14, but mostly 15 & up receiving their endowments.

 

Basically, the age for endowments has always been roughly equivalent to the age we approve of marrying.  Now that we frown on marrying before 18 (or 21) we naturally question endowments before those ages.  Back when they married younger they endowed younger too.

[ERayR]

Just wanted to know how other feel.

 

It is based on a long lost, newly discovered home video from Adam.

[ERayR]

I'm currently studying my way through the New Oxford Annotated Bible (throwing in Joseph Smith Translation where applicable) as well as using a couple commentaries while perusing and it turns out that the Garden of Eden was considered a model temple for the ancient Israelites. This adds another layer of symbolism when we consider the covenants, events, and doctrines surrounding Eden.

 

By the way, thank you Tacenda.

 

I am glad to hear that as it corroborates what I have taught my children for years.  I look at the Garden of Eden as an interface between the Celestial Kingdom and Earth (Temple).

[Kenngo1969]

Pssssst!  The conspiratorialists are a day late and a dollar short on that one!  We've been sending 18-year-olds on missions for over a year now.  It would only stand to reason that they receive their Endowments before they go!

 

 

They were endowing soldiers before sending them off to fight in WWII:  not all, but a sizable number.

 

I don't doubt they were endowing a sizeable number of young soldiers before sending them off into a conflict from which many of them, sadly, would not emerge alive.

 

This is for non missionaries also.  But definitely must be worthy, I'm sure. 

 

I doubt it.  I sat in a Bishopric Meeting last Sunday morning in which was circulated an update/addition to the policy in Hanbook 1 of who may be endowed.  I don't recall the whole thing verbatim, but the gist of it is: (a) that age is simply a number; there's nothing magic about any particular number when it comes to being endowed (there are people who are 18 going on 30, and others who are 30 going on 12); (2) the only circumstances under which people should be endowed simply as a matter of course are (a) before departing for a mission and (b ) before being sealed.  They should not be endowed simply as a matter of course before, e.g., leaving home for school or employment.  

[BlueDreams]

I don't doubt they were endowing a sizeable number of young soldiers before sending them off into a conflict from which many of them, sadly, would not emerge alive.

 

 

I doubt it.  I sat in a Bishopric Meeting last Sunday morning in which was circulated an update/addition to the policy in Hanbook 1 of who may be endowed.  I don't recall the whole thing verbatim, but the gist of it is: (a) that age is simply a number; there's nothing magic about any particular number when it comes to being endowed (there are people who are 18 going on 30, and others who are 30 going on 12); (2) the only circumstances under which people should be endowed simply as a matter of course are (a) before departing for a mission and (b ) before being sealed.  They should not be endowed simply as a matter of course before, e.g., leaving home for school or employment.  

 

I think that probably depends on what stake/ward you are in. My bishop is pretty good in letting sisters who aren't getting married anytime soon and who aren't going on missions either, to be endowed. My roommate, for example is around 22 or 23 and is going to get endowed this weekend. I don't think endowments should be perfunctory to any major change in life, but I do think they should be treated more like receiving PB's (in the case outside of marriage/missions). Once you feel like it's time, it's time barring any worthiness issues.

 

With luv,

BD

[Kenngo1969]

I think that probably depends on what stake/ward you are in. My bishop is pretty good in letting sisters who aren't getting married anytime soon and who aren't going on missions either, to be endowed. My roommate, for example is around 22 or 23 and is going to get endowed this weekend. I don't think endowments should be perfunctory to any major change in life, but I do think they should be treated more like receiving PB's (in the case outside of marriage/missions). Once you feel like it's time, it's time barring any worthiness issues.

 

With luv,

BD

OK.  Keep in mind, this didn't come from my Stake.  It didn't come from my Ward.  It didn't come from my Region or Area.  It is an official addition to Handbook 1.  The Handbooks allow for a fair amount of variation in how things are done depending on local circumstances in several instances, but I don't think this is one of them.  I write above of young people who are 18 going on 30, while others are 30 going on 12.  Perhaps your Ward/Stake is populated far more by the former than by the latter.  Your roommate probably falls into the former category.  The ordinances she is about to receive probably have more to do with that than with any special dispensation your unit has received to deviate from the announced policy of who may receive those ordinances.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

It is discouraged from what I hear to give people endowments just because they want to go to a sibling or friend's sealing or such things.  I would think a lot would depend on the person's history with the one giving the recommend.  If they knew the individual was mature and able to live up to the covenants made, they would not be reluctant; however, if they knew the person had demonstrated in the past some lack of self control, they might withhold the recommend they might give to another.

[BlueDreams]

OK.  Keep in mind, this didn't come from my Stake.  It didn't come from my Ward.  It didn't come from my Region or Area.  It is an official addition to Handbook 1.  The Handbooks allow for a fair amount of variation in how things are done depending on local circumstances in several instances, but I don't think this is one of them.  I write above of young people who are 18 going on 30, while others are 30 going on 12.  Perhaps your Ward/Stake is populated far more by the former than by the latter.  Your roommate probably falls into the former category.  

 

I don't know...It's not like she's immature, but she's fairly standard on maturity level for her age. It could have more to do with where I'm at and the discrepancy that you begin to see here between genders and temple exp....and the emphasis overall in our YSA stake for temple workers. We have more temple workers in our entire stake than any other YSA stake. Plus, even with the change in mission age, still more women are not going on missions than are and most of them are not getting married super young (ie 18-20 range). So you get a significant proportion of adult women who can only attend baptisms while most men and RM women are able to attend, participate, and even work in the temple. It has a very beneficial effect to have more endowed, participate, and thinking about temple ordinances. And it shows in the temple itself as well.....there is a disproportionate number of workers who are young (early 22-33 range, usually). Some are newly married, some are RM's, and a number are neither. Not that there's large droves that are getting endowed of course either....

 

 

With luv,

BD   

Edited June 5, 2014 by BlueDreams

[Kenngo1969]

It is discouraged from what I hear to give people endowments just because they want to go to a sibling or friend's sealing or such things.  I would think a lot would depend on the person's history with the one giving the recommend.  If they knew the individual was mature and able to live up to the covenants made, they would not be reluctant; however, if they knew the person had demonstrated in the past some lack of self control, they might withhold the recommend they might give to another.

Yep.  Now that you mention it, the new Handbook instruction discourages/prohibits the practice of dispensing recommends simply so that, e.g., siblings can attend sealings, and says that a person's prior history should factor strongly into the decision whether to issue a recommend.

[Calm]

I think it would make a big difference if what triggered someone seeking a recommend is a desire to attend the temple as opposed to a one time event they want to be part of.

In the first case attending the temple frequently can help with commitment to covenants, in the second the person made not be ready to make the covenant and if they make mistakes, then they have the added penalty of breaking the Tempe covenant.

Not saying a bishop should be guessing who is and isn't likely to break the law of chastity, just that such considerations of whether it will be a help or too much responsibility at that time for the individual are appropriate.

[Kenngo1969]

I think it would make a big difference if what triggered someone seeking a recommend is a desire to attend the temple as opposed to a one time event they want to be part of.

In the first case attending the temple frequently can help with commitment to covenants, in the second the person made not be ready to make the covenant and if they make mistakes, then they have the added penalty of breaking the Tempe covenant.

 

I think you're right in everything you say here.  (Shocking, I know! )

 

Not saying a bishop should be guessing who is and isn't likely to break the law of chastity, just that such considerations of whether it will be a help or too much responsibility at that time for the individual are appropriate.

 

 

I'm not saying Bishops are perfect.  (On occasion, my inability to read my Bishop's mind has been one of my chief liabilities ... but he's being released next week ... )  However, you might be surprised to learn (I know I have been) to what degree discernment (which I will define, for purposes of this discussion, as the ability to hear and heed the Voice of the Spirit in matters over which one has been given stewardship) comes into play.  I have heard that Voice on occasion, in matters as seemingly mundane as, "Psst!  Ken, take that piece of paper to the meeting you're about to go to; you're going to need it!"  (Keep in mind that this often is an "out-of-the-blue" thing: more often than not [in fact, usually], I don't have any other reason to believe that , except that little voice ...)  

 

But as much as I have experienced this in the mundane, often relatively-small-stakes matters in which I have been involved, my Bishop has experienced it that much more, in matters large and small: whom to call to what calling, whom to enlist and what other resources to call upon to resolve an issue, the weather when it comes to whether to proceed with plans to hold outdoor ward activities ...  I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't spent the last 32 months at my Bishop's elbow observing it firsthand. (Personally, I think I've been in the calling about 18 months too long, and that, although my current Bishop has learned to deal with the disappointment engendered by my often-subpar performance of my calling, I fear the same won't be true of his replacement.  But I serve where I'm called, for however long I'm called ...)  On another occasion, when my dad was discussing a disciplinary matter with the Bishop to whom he was a counselor, he thought the Bishop's proposed course of action, given the circumstances, the person involved, and that person's history, was quite severe.  But sure enough, within a short time, the reasons the Bishop proffered for taking the action he eventually did prove to be sound.

 

All of which is a long way of saying that guesswork is one thing: discernment is entirely another.

 

P.S.: Doctrine 612: "Dang it, you guys, quit derailing my thread, whydon'tcha?!!"

 

Sorry ...

Edited June 5, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Calm]

Which is why I used guesswork and not discernment because I agree with you about the potential of the Spirit's impact on the Bishop's judgment.

[Kenngo1969]

Which is why I used guesswork and not discernment because I agree with you about the potential of the Spirit's impact on the Bishop's judgment.

Fair 'nough!

[Doctrine 612]

Lol.

Edited June 5, 2014 by Doctrine 612

[Kenngo1969]

Anyway, as an old AP English teacher of mine used to say when he used most of a class period going off on a tangent, "Meanwhile, back at the ranch ..."  (He was in his last year of teaching, and he did that a lot: he'd say, "Meanwhile, back at the ranch ..." and the bell would ring a couple minutes later, and he'd say, "Shootily doodly damned ..." as if the tangent weren't planned  .  Ahhh, good times!)

 

"Meanwhile, back at the ranch ..."  There are at least two schools of thought about whether and to what degree to accept a certain scriptural account as literal or metaphorical: one says that's a slippery slope, and when you do that, what's to stop you from casting fundamental doctrines such as the Atonement and the Resurrection into the realm of metaphor? Another says that whether a particular account is metaphorical or not is less important than its effectiveness as a teaching tool to teach profound truths.  Account of Adam and Eve: Metaphor?  I dunno.  I do know that I've learned profound truths from the way the Endowment uses that account as a teaching tool.

 

P.S.: To be clear, whether the Fall happened precisely the way the Holy Bible recounts it, I accept it, its consequences, and the subsequent Atonement and Redemption as realities.  That probably marks me as inconsistent in some quarters, but such is it to be human: we're delightfully, maddeningly inconsistent creatures!

Edited June 5, 2014 by Kenngo1969