Significance Of Stars / Seal Of Melchizedek

[JLHPROF]

Fascinating new article on the Seal of Melchizedek got me thinking of something I read somewhere years ago.

 

http://ldsmag.com/the-seal-of-melchizedek-and-the-design-of-the-san-diego-temple/

 

Do any of our archaeologically inclined board members know anything else about the seal of Melchizedek?

 

As a related topic, the memory that came to me was of a speculative document I read years ago about the number of points on a star representing our progression.

 

1 - The one point (representing our uncreated intelligence)

2 - The two points  (representing the union of that intelligence with a spirit body)

3 - The three points (triangle - representing birth - Father, Mother Child)

4 - The four points (being square before the Lord, Baptism, the Sacrament)

5 - The five points (mortal man approaching the veil, seen moving downward to earth on the SL Temple body and then back up the towers toward God).

6 - The six points (star/seal of David - representing a future resurrected being, heaven & earth/physical & spiritual bodies combined)

7 - The seven points (representing a King & Priest/2nd anointings but I can't remember why)

8 - The seal of Melchizedek (representing the Savior, the King of Kings and Great High Priest)

And of course each star representing increased light at each stage.

And onwards forever...

 

Anyway, don't bother CFRing any of this speculation.  I don't even remember where I came across it.  But given this article it came creeping back to me.

Edited April 29, 2015 by JLHPROF

[The Nehor]

I am pretty sure it is more useful for containing summoned demons. That is what I use if for anyways.

[JLHPROF]

I am pretty sure it is more useful for containing summoned demons. That is what I use if for anyways.

 

That would be a pentagram, an upside down 5 pointed star (representing a being falling from the presence of God).

But I doubt it has any effect... :diablo:

[CV75]

Anyway, don't bother CFRing any of this speculation.  I don't even remember where I came across it.  But given this article it came creeping back to me.

Nor this one: I once observed that the interlocking squares on the Mayan glyph “Pop” (first month of the 365-day Mayan calendar) are interesting from the Melchizedek perspective in that name “Pop” is translated as “the ruler” or “council of elders,” and the month is a symbol of community and marriage.

 

But also, the Mayans invented Lil Wayne:

[Duncan]

Read this

 

http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/volume-11-number-3-2010/seal-melchizedek-0

[JLHPROF]

Read this

 

http://rsc.byu.edu/archived/volume-11-number-3-2010/seal-melchizedek-0

 

Interesting article but the author misses a key point which he himself makes in the article.

 

 

Hence, while we have no historic connection of the gamma with Melchizedek, its symbolic meaning has numerous connections with Christ.

.....

The number eight is a very developed symbol in ancient and modern Christianity. It is traditionally associated with the concepts of resurrection, new beginnings, rebirth, renewal, and baptism.  Because of its association with these aforementioned ideas, it is sometimes also seen as the number of Christ. Indeed, one text notes, “Eight is the dominical number, for everywhere it has to do with the Lord. It is the number of His name, ΙΗΣΟΥΣ, Jesus,” which totals 888 in Greek gematria.  This same source indicates that “other Dominical Names of Jesus are also marked by gematria and stamped with the number eight as a factor”—titles such as Christ, Lord, Savior, Emmanuel, or Messiah.  In reference to the symbolism of eight in the Resurrection, one author wrote, “Christ rose from the dead on ‘the first day of the week,’ that was of necessity the eighth day.”   Additionally, for all of those born in the covenant, baptism is to be performed at the age of eight (D&C 68:27). The intricately connected symbols of baptism, new beginnings, resurrection, Christ, and the number eight are natural and appropriate. In each case, Christ is the source.

.....

When one takes all that is known from ancient and scholarly sources about the various symbolic elements of the so-called seal of Melchizedek, it appears in all cases to be Christocentric rather than Melchizedek-centric.

.....

Because this article is unlikely to end the popular practice among Mormons of claiming the aforementioned design as the ancient seal of Melchizedek and a symbol for the higher priesthood, I leave it to readers to decide whether to embrace or reject the symbol.  For this author it matters little—though frankly, if we as a people are to adopt this symbol, it would be more appropriate to interpret it as a representation of Christ rather than as a symbol of one whose life typified him.

The article claims that while it may be a symbol for Christ it is NOT the seal of Melchizedek or a sign of his priesthood.

 

I would agree that "the seal of Melchizedek" may not be an ancient label for this sign.

However the article attempts to separate claims that while it may be a symbol for Christ it is NOT the seal of Melchizedek or a sign of his priesthood.

 

The author has clearly forgotten that there is no priesthood of Melchizedek.  It is actually the priesthood after the order of the son of God.  He is creating a separation where one is not needed.

If it is a symbol of Christ/Christ's authority then it is also a symbol of Christ's priesthood, which we call the Melchizedek priesthood.

 

Why the author of this article felt that the appellation "Seal of Melchizedek" was so wrong but to attribute the symbol to Christ was ok I don't know.  Maybe he'd have been happier if we'd called it the "Seal After The Order Of The Son Of God".

 

The 8 sided star represents Christ in my opinion (as I wrote in the OP).  Whether it can be rightly called "The Seal of Melchizedek" or not.  And is a very appropriate symbol for the Lord's House.

[mfbukowski]

Interesting article but the author misses a key point which he himself makes in the article.

 

 

I would agree that "the seal of Melchizedek" may not be an ancient label for this sign.

However the article attempts to separate claims that while it may be a symbol for Christ it is NOT the seal of Melchizedek or a sign of his priesthood.

 

The author has clearly forgotten that there is no priesthood of Melchizedek.  It is actually the priesthood after the order of the son of God.  He is creating a separation where one is not needed.

If it is a symbol of Christ/Christ's authority then it is also a symbol of Christ's priesthood, which we call the Melchizedek priesthood.

 

Why the author of this article felt that the appellation "Seal of Melchizedek" was so wrong but to attribute the symbol to Christ was ok I don't know.  Maybe he'd have been happier if we'd called it the "Seal After The Order Of The Son Of God".

 

The 8 sided star represents Christ in my opinion (as I wrote in the OP).  Whether it can be rightly called "The Seal of Melchizedek" or not.  And is a very appropriate symbol for the Lord's House.

Totally 100 percent agree.

That article is one of the most ponderously pretentious things I have ever read.

If a symbol helps one think of the savior, it is serving its function.

[mfbukowski]

Another interesting article

http://bycommonconsent.com/2014/04/10/a-warning-about-alonzo-gaskills-new-book/

[Calm]

Another interesting article

http://bycommonconsent.com/2014/04/10/a-warning-about-alonzo-gaskills-new-book/

Apparently the author realized he made a mistake:

 

http://alonzogaskill.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-note-to-reader.html

 

In my original manuscript I discussed the controversy surrounding the text, its historicity, origins, etc., at the beginning of the book—and did so in more depth than in the published version of the text. However, each of the reviewers found that a distraction from the main purpose of the text, which was intended as a piece of devotional literature and not an academic treatise. Thus, it was recommended that I pare down the discussion to make it less academic in its tone, and also move it to an appendix, which I did. (In retrospect, that may have been a poor decision—as was including the text in the first place.)

            I fully acknowledge my naiveté in presuming that using a text like this as a “springboard” into a doctrinal discussion would not be problematic. And while the concerns over my book are not doctrinal, I certainly underestimated the intensity of feelings others would have over the historicity issues. In addition, I assumed readers would take into consideration more than just the Notovitch text—which is why I had pointed to others who claimed to have seen his purported Tibetan text. In writing this, I believed that the target audience would not care about the referenced controversy, and that academics would realize this was intended as a devotional piece and, thus, not offered as a statement about the historicity of the claims of Notovitch or of those who visited the monastery in the years after his visit. For any confusion this might have caused, I earnestly apologize. 

 

[The Nehor]

That would be a pentagram, an upside down 5 pointed star (representing a being falling from the presence of God).

But I doubt it has any effect... :diablo:

 

That is what the demons want you to think. Their propaganda has kept us from enslaving demonkind for years.

[mfbukowski]

That is what the demons want you to think. Their propaganda has kept us from enslaving demonkind for years.

The Nauvoo temple has many inverted pentagrams.

Th meaning of symbols is based in their intended context. Swastikas are Native sun symbols.

The letter F can be used in profanity or the word Faith.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_temples/Inverted_Stars_on_LDS_Temples

[mfbukowski]

Apparently the author realized he made a mistake:

 

http://alonzogaskill.blogspot.com/2014/04/a-note-to-reader.html

Mixing history with doctrine and theology is always a hazardous enterprise.