Ezra Taft Benson Lesson 13: Priceless Blessings Of The House Of The Lord

[mfbukowski]

I'm giving this lesson tomorrow.  There are some things I don't understand or know.  I don't expect information to be posted here in time, though it would be nice.  I probably won't be using much of this in the lesson so it is mostly for me.   You can find the lesson here.  This article is also referenced in the lesson and has more information when you compare them side by side. Because it will get way too long I am only going to post quotes I am asking about.  

 

I just want to learn here.  Bickering will ruin things for me so if you feel you need to do that PLEASE do it elsewhere. 

 

 

In red: So the order of the Son of God is more than getting the Melchizedek priesthood because you only get the fullness after you have entered the temple.  It "happens" when you are sealed (and throughout life)?  

 

Does it apply to women and we just skipped Melchizedek and aaronic?

 

In blue:  what revelation is he talking about?

 

In green underline: So Elijah only restored the Melchizedek priesthood to Peter James and John and not the keys of the fullness of the Melchizedek priesthood or order of the Son of God? It's not because they didn't have a temple operating correctly.  Until Elijah restored it then it couldn't be operating correctly and fully.  So why not restore the keys to them? 

No time to read the thread- just found this but I will give my opinion and then move on..

 

Women are included in all priesthood covenants, they do not need to have the priesthood.  This is blunt and I cannot go into it all due to it being what is told us in the temple, which many people do not know simply because I am in a position to be able to compare the promises given to women with those given to men because I am an ordinance worker and so is my daughter and we can discuss these things in the temple.  All this is available to anyone though who goes with their spouse and discusses it in the celestial room afterward.

 

The fullness of the priesthood is exaltation.  Look up and read about the Church of the Firstborn in D&C.  Just look that up and read the references.

 

The church is based on the family.  The Godhead is essentially a family, and we are to "grow up" and be like Mom and Dad.  The Church of the Firstborn is all those who are exalted together in one family, hopefully all mankind into one family, exalted under Our Father, all with out own families together as our children, parents etc.

 

The sealing ordinances speak of principalities powers and authorities, which basically mean that family is the cornerstone of government.  The ideal family IS the government and the government ideally is the family.  That, I believe is how it is supposed to be.  When sealed, in the eternities, that is the way it will be I believe.  The principalities are real principalities- real governments to be established essentially as family dynasties of perfected humans.  That is what I believe it is saying.

 

So no fullness until exaltation, then a perfected government based on the exalted family., all of which is called the fulness of the priesthood.

 

That's ,my opinion on this all, nothing more.  Sorry about typos I am in a hurry, but wanted to get that said.

[Tacenda]

And of course you were silent about it all? I would have spoken up and stated my opinion. People are people and people have a host of ideas and misunderstandings. But it is up to you to speak up in such meetings and state your opinions about idol worhip etc. Why remain silent and use it against what they say if you remain silent?

But I have seen this before from other posters on other boards too. They seem to 'relish' in hearing strange things coming out of lds mouths and but say nothing to get them to think about what they are saying and offering a different perspective. Such meetings should be learning opportunities for all.

I may have come off harshly, but it was hard to see what is happening. Maybe it will change with each dispensation. I'm not relishing saying this. I just want feedback, am I wrong to think that's idol worship? Do we need to talk about this? I'll bet I wasn't the only one on the board who experienced this yesterday, or other times. Edited July 13, 2015 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

Which is strange since there is plenty written on the subject. It is scriptural, recorded clearly in Church history, and still performed in the Church today.

But since it is so sacred much of the discussion would verge on breaking the "no temple content" rule. Just as with the endowment the full text is available online, but there is something so blasphemous about it being readily readable. I am always torn between studying these things and growing in knowledge of the gospel vs making light of sacred things.

But Joseph Smith was very clear that it was the necessary step to receiving your Calling and Election Made Sure (the visitation of Christ, the second Comforter.).

Why isn't Christ doing the calling and election made sure ceremony? I'm sure there are those like Hans Mattson that thought something like that would occur, but didn't. How can you say there is a visitation from Christ? Edited July 13, 2015 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

Why isn't Christ doing the calling and election made sure ceremony? I'm sure there are those like Hans Mattson that think something like that will occur, but doesn't. How can you say there is a visitation from Christ?

 

1. How do we know he isn't visiting people who have received the proper ordinances and making their Calling and Election sure?

2. If he isn't visiting people it will be because the established laws connected with that blessing aren't being kept correctly.  I would hope someone is doing so somewhere.

3. The proper required ordinance is being performed by priesthood authority.  It is then up to the individual to be worthy of Christ's presence.

[CV75]

Christ would disagree.  He had the ordinance performed for the apostles and by his wife.

 

Joseph Smith would disagree.  He had the ordinance performed for the apostles and by his wife.

 

The scriptures still contain Revelation 1:6 last I checked.

 

And this ordinance is still being performed so it is available and being performed by our current General Authorities for some reason.

There was a big debate among general authorities in the 1930's when the performance of this was reduced, but it has never ceased.

 

And even if not mentioned in those sources, it is still required to have your Calling and Election made Sure.  Without it we cannot receive that blessing.  Any source that proclaims an ordinance revealed from heaven to be unnecessary is about as valid as the Christian who calls Baptism an unnecessary work.

 

Joseph Smith taught that the ordinances were created before the foundation of the world and are not to be changed or altered.  All men must be saved/exalted by the same process.  He also taught that if ordinances are changed so is the priesthood that we hold.  There is a direct connection between priesthood authority and unchanging ordinances.  D&C 130 is clear that EVERY blessing has a law attached and if the law is not lived the blessing is not given, even if God himself revoke the law according to D&C 58.  That includes the blessing of the second comforter. 

You are evidently quite “enthusiastic” about creating ordinance requirements for the saints that our General Authorities haven’t issued in our day.

 

Just because Jesus in his earthly mission, and Joseph Smith in his day, taught and bound the truth to the saints living in their place and time using formats that are different than our modern oracles do does not mean that we have lost anything. For example, it is not necessary for us to make clay of spittle to bless the sick, though that ordinance was clearly revealed from heaven; the same with clapping the hands to give the Gift of the Holy Ghost, as Alma did; the same with using water instead of wine.

 

While all the saving ordinances involve physical contact, the only saving ordinance that hasn’t changed since Adam is baptism by immersion. Everything else, including the temple ordinances, has changed or is subject to change in form, format or requirement, hence the changes that have been made throughout our current dispensation. The restored Gospel (the mission of Jesus) and all its principles have remained unchanged from the foundation of the world. The forms, formats and administrations of the ordinances binding us to them have rightly changed under His direction.

 

What is "even if not mentioned in those sources" supposed mean, anyway?

[sheilauk]

I went to RS today and regret it. I don't think I can stand to go back. Today they of course talked about the temple. Then it turned into a discussion about how we need to get the youth to go as often as possible. One mother spoke to say she takes her younger children to just go and touch the temple. I don't think this idol worship is right.

Do you know what idol worship actually is?  It is the worship of a physical object as a representation of a god.  So, did your sister tell her children to pray to the temple?  Did she tell them it was god or represented god? Did they bow down to the temple?  Has she said that the temple will answer prayers?  Or was she simply trying to instill in the children a love of the temple by getting them as close as they can be without actually going inside and feeling the spirit in there?  Was she worshiping the temple or was she trying to explain how important the temple is because of the ordinances that take place there, the spirit that resides there and the revelation that can take place there.and having that message reinforced by the use of as many of their senses as possible - seeing it, hearing her talk about it, the smell around about and the feel of it?  My stake president was called around three years ago.  Since then, his constant message has been to go to the temple as often as possible.  He arranges many stake visits and encourages ward visits.  He encourages parents to take all their children and to go and touch the walls of the temple.  A great many families in my stake have photos of their children outside the temple, often touching the walls.  Afterwards, the children are so excited by the thought of one day going inside to do baptisms etc.  The children in my ward know what the temple is for - a place to get married for eternity and to do the work of the Saviour in bringing the gospel to their ancestors.  Since he became Stake President, i think temple attendance has grown and the genealogy work has increased and I know a lot of the older children are involved in that. Is he inspired?  Or an idol worshipper?  The people in my ward really seem to love the temple and many go often.  They love it for the peace, the work and the revelation.  They do not worship the temple.  They do worship the Lord.  In testimony, many will refer to both.  There is no shortage of mention of Christ in my ward, if I listen for it.  Our RS lesson on this chapter was lovely and I'm the first to feel frustrated in RS generally!  My ward is far from perfect, but I try to view things with a positive slant.

[sheilauk]

Why isn't Christ doing the calling and election made sure ceremony? I'm sure there are those like Hans Mattson that thought something like that would occur, but didn't. How can you say there is a visitation from Christ?

How do you know Christ isn't visiting people?  Do you really think that people would speak about it in these days?  Something that profound?  Many things need to be left unsaid whilst the rest of us have faith.  And if you did hear of Christ visiting someone, or Hans Mattson did, would it boost your faith, or would it be very difficult to believe?  Would they be more likely to be thought deluded?

[Avatar4321]

I'd like to heard how the lessons went

[Tacenda]

I'd like to heard how the lessons went

You heard my take.  The teacher was a sub, but did a fairly decent job.  Although we didn't get into the deep doctrine.  When do we ever.

 

How did your lesson go?  And Rain's lesson, if you're reading.   

[JLHPROF]

While all the saving ordinances involve physical contact, the only saving ordinance that hasn’t changed since Adam is baptism by immersion. Everything else, including the temple ordinances, has changed or is subject to change in form, format or requirement, hence the changes that have been made throughout our current dispensation. The restored Gospel (the mission of Jesus) and all its principles have remained unchanged from the foundation of the world. The forms, formats and administrations of the ordinances binding us to them have rightly changed under His direction.

 

 

Completely disagree.

 

 

Just because Jesus in his earthly mission, and Joseph Smith in his day, taught and bound the truth to the saints living in their place and time using formats that are different than our modern oracles do does not mean that we have lost anything.

 

You are evidently quite “enthusiastic” about creating ordinance requirements for the saints that our General Authorities haven’t issued in our day.

What is "even if not mentioned in those sources" supposed mean, anyway?

 

It means this ordinance is still performed for GA's but not revealed to the general membership.  You seem to be implying that it is not issued anymore, when we know full well it is.

[mfbukowski]

Completely disagree.

 

 

It means this ordinance is still performed for GA's but not revealed to the general membership.  You seem to be implying that it is not issued anymore, when we know full well it is.

I have asked temple presidents about it and they have said they have "heard nothing about it".  Not "know nothing about it" but HEARD.

 

I am sure they were not lying.  They could easily have said that they have covenanted not to discuss it.

[JLHPROF]

I have asked temple presidents about it and they have said they have "heard nothing about it".  Not "know nothing about it" but HEARD.

 

I am sure they were not lying.  They could easily have said that they have covenanted not to discuss it.

 

So sad.

[Stargazer]

It means this ordinance is still performed for GA's but not revealed to the general membership.  You seem to be implying that it is not issued anymore, when we know full well it is.

I have been interested in this ever since I heard of it, years and years ago, but it isn't discussed openly, and my only source of information about this was a book called "Mysteries of Godliness" or something like that. Don't remember the author, but I found the book in Barnes and Noble, and bought it so it wouldn't fall into the hands of any nonmembers. I didn't read the entire thing, and I don't think it was written by a very faithful member (why would he write about such things? if he he were). But I do recall him mentioning a letter or note from a member of the Twelve who was questioning why so few 2nd anointings were being performed, and worried that it might be lost due to disuse.

Well, what is your source for knowing "full well" it is being performed?

[Stargazer]

You heard my take.  The teacher was a sub, but did a fairly decent job.  Although we didn't get into the deep doctrine.  When do we ever.

 

How did your lesson go?  And Rain's lesson, if you're reading.

Mine went quite well. It went exactly as planned out with a lot of commentary. We didn't get into a lot of deep doctrine.

[mfbukowski]

It could well be just performed for the Q of 12 or others specially invited and performed by the first presidency itself.

 

That would be consistent with all the data I have on it.  It is probably performed, if at all, at the SLC temple only so other temple presidents may not be aware of it unless they are personally involved.

 

But that is speculation.

 

I won't mention my receiving the ordinance of course   (just kidding)

[JLHPROF]

It could well be just performed for the Q of 12 or others specially invited and performed by the first presidency itself.

 

That would be consistent with all the data I have on it.  It is probably performed, if at all, at the SLC temple only so other temple presidents may not be aware of it unless they are personally involved.

 

But that is speculation.

 

I won't mention my receiving the ordinance of course   (just kidding)

 

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

Just kidding.  But I think you are pretty close to accurate here, although I would wager it is occasionally performed in other temples.

 

I am feeling that as much as I HATE HATE HATE the downplaying of the most sacred crowning ordinance of the restored gospel among some members, that discussing it openly is basically sacrilegious.  As I said before, anyone who wants to know everything about it can find it out quite easily.  Just as with the endowment.  There are accounts of it going back to the early days of the Church and currently.  It is written about in many books.

But in my "enthusiastic" belief in the ordinance perhaps I am erring in debating the most sacred.

[mfbukowski]

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

Just kidding. But I think you are pretty close to accurate here, although I would wager it is occasionally performed in other temples.

I am feeling that as much as I HATE HATE HATE the downplaying of the most sacred crowning ordinance of the restored gospel among some members, that discussing it openly is basically sacrilegious. As I said before, anyone who wants to know everything about it can find it out quite easily. Just as with the endowment. There are accounts of it going back to the early days of the Church and currently. It is written about in many books.

But in my "enthusiastic" belief in the ordinance perhaps I am erring in debating the most sacred.

All I can say is anyone who publicly says they have had the ordinance is lying.

Think about it. As for the alleged curremnt accounts,Either the prophet picked the wrong couple, someone is breaking covenants, or plain lying.

I vote for the last option

The historic accounts are all we really have to look at.

Edited July 14, 2015 by mfbukowski

[CV75]

It means this ordinance is still performed for GA's but not revealed to the general membership.  You seem to be implying that it is not issued anymore, when we know full well it is.

"We" do not "know full well... " Your position seems to be based on what I consider to be spurious modern accounts, historical records of past performances, and a narrow understanding of what an ordinance is. For the last problem, see the full record of Jospeh Smith's oft-cited quote in History of the Church, Volume 5:423-427: https://byustudies.byu.edu/hc/hcpgs/hc.aspx?HC=/hc/2/25.html&A=318

 

Note that “ordinance” in the context of being instituted refers to an edict, decree, law, injunction, fiat, command, order, rule, ruling, dictum, dictate, directive, mandate, etc. In this usage it is not a rite or ritual. Only in the context of its administration, does "ordinance" refer to a rite.

 

Hence, from the quote from "The Prophet's Discourse—The Purpose of the Gathering of Israel," we see that “Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world…” refers to the principles or conditions of salvation, which are the Gospel of Christ and His doctrine. This is especially evident from the last entence in that paragraph (see full quote below). The means of transmitting and adminsitering these conditions of salvation can change from dispensation to dispensation and within dispensations.

 

From the above link, [bracketed notations are mine], I've selected a few paragraphs to demonstrate how to distinsuish between a principle and a rite:

 

"...What was the object of gathering the Jews, or the people of God in any age of the world? ...

 

"The main object was to build unto the Lord a house whereby He could reveal unto His people the ordinances of His house and the glories of His kingdom [laws and rites], and teach the people the way of salvation [laws]; for there are certain ordinances and principles [laws] that, when they are taught [by rite] and practiced [by covenant], must be done in a place or house built for that purpose.

 

"It was the design of the councils of heaven before the world was, that the principles and laws of the priesthood should be predicated upon the gathering of the people in every age of the world. Jesus did everything to gather the people, and they would not be gathered, and He therefore poured out curses upon them. Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles.

 

"It is for the same purpose that God gathers together His people in the last days, to build unto the Lord a house to prepare them for the ordinances [laws] and endowments [rite], washings and anointings, etc. [rites as established by the President] One of the ordinances [laws] of the house of the Lord is baptism for the dead. God decreed before the foundation of the world that that ordinance should be administered [rite] in a font prepared for that purpose in the house of the Lord. "This is only your opinion, sir," says the sectarian. * * * * *

 

"If a man gets a fullness of the priesthood of God, he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments [laws which do not change] and obeying all the ordinances [rites, which can change] of the house of the Lord.

 

"Where there is no change of priesthood, there is no change of ordinances, says Paul, if God has not changed the ordinances and the priesthood. Howl, ye sectarians! If he has, when and where has He revealed it? Have ye turned revelators? Then why deny revelation?

 

"Many men will say, "I will never forsake you, but will stand by you at all times." But the moment you teach them some of the mysteries of the kingdom of God that are retained in the heavens and are to be revealed to the children of men when they are prepared for them, they will be the first to stone you and put you to death. It was this same principle that crucified the Lord Jesus Christ, and will cause the people to kill the prophets in this generation. [Jesus changed no law, but fulfilled it and changed the rites.]

 

"Many things are insoluble to the children of men in the last days: for instance, that God should raise the dead, and forgetting that things have been hid from before the foundation of the world, which are to be revealed to babes in the last days.

 

"There are a great many wise men and women too in our midst who are too wise to be taught; therefore they must die in their ignorance, and in the resurrection they will find their mistake. Many seal up the door of heaven by saying, So far God may reveal and I will believe.

 

"All men who become heirs of God and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ will have to receive the fullness of the ordinances of his kingdom [both laws which change and rites as administered tot them, which do change]; And those who will not receive all the ordinances will come short of the fullness of that glory, if they do not lose the whole.

 

"I will say something about the spirits in prison. There has been much said by modern divines about the words of Jesus (when on the cross) to the thief, saying, "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise." King James' translators make it out to say paradise. But what is paradise? It is a modern word it does not answer at all to the original word that Jesus made use of. Find the original of the word paradise. You may as easily find a needle in a haymow. Here is a chance for battle, ye learned men. There is nothing in the original word in Greek froze which this was taken that signifies paradise; but it was—This day thou shalt be with me in the world of spirits: then I will teach you all about it and answer your inquiries. And Peter says he went and preached to the world of spirits (spirits in prison, I Peter, 3rd chap., 19th verse), so that they who would receive it [the ordinance or law] could have it answered by proxy [the rite] by those who live on the earth, etc.

 

"The doctrine [ordinance] of baptism for the dead is clearly shown in the New Testament; and if the doctrine is not good, then throw the New Testament away; but if it is the word of God, then let the doctrine be acknowledged; and it was the reason why Jesus said unto the Jews, "How oft would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"—that they might attend [performance of rites] to the ordinances [doctrines] of baptism for the dead as well as other ordinances of the priesthood, and receive revelations from heaven, and be perfected in the things of the kingdom of God—but they would not. This was the case on the day of Pentecost: those blessings were poured out on the disciples on that occasion. God ordained that He would save the dead, and would do it by gathering His people together.

 

***

 

"A man of God should be endowed with wisdom, knowledge, and understanding [in the form of God’s ordinances to him], in order to teach and lead the people of God [in the form of rites]. The sectarian priests are blind, and they lead the blind, and they will all fall into the ditch together. They build with hay, wood, and stubble, on the old revelations, without the true priesthood or spirit of revelation. If I had time, I would dig into hell, hades, shaole, and tell what exists there.

 

***

 

"These things [“ordinances” as in laws, truths, and teachings; rites and rituals administered by those with the keys to convey and perform them] are revealed in the most holy place in a Temple prepared for that purpose. Many of the sects cry out, "Oh, I have the testimony of Jesus; I have the Spirit of God: but away with Joe Smith; he says he is a prophet; but there are to be no prophets or revelators in the last days." Stop, sir: The Revelator says that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy; so by your own month you are condemned. But to the text. Why gather the people together in this place? For the same purpose that Jesus wanted to gather the Jews—to receive the ordinances, the blessings, and glories that God has in store for His Saints."

 

***

[Rain]

 

Do you think they would cut you off at the knees if you did it on the talk, instead of the lesson?  I bet I could get away with it.

 

I think that the Spirit directed me to use just the manual so I don't think I could get away with it.

Lesson went well. The Spirit was powerful. I ended up asking questions I hadn't thought of before. Like we went over the from the life of president Benson section and asked if anyone had some early memories of the temple that influenced them. We had a good discussion going before we even got to the meat of the lesson.

 

I'm glad.  Mine went well as well though I did worry a few people at the start.    Several people came up to me afterwards though and thanked me and appreciated the direction I went.  I actually started out with the idea that some people have struggled with the temple for one reason or another.  We talked of some of those things.  We talked of the temple being a sign that God loves us and that His hand is stretched forth still. It was somewhat different than I had planned.

 

I had called the day before to find out if the letter was going to be read that hour so I could prepare differently.  The RSP hadn't heard anything at that point. My husband went to ward council and then they found out it would be read.  So that took about 15 minutes off my lesson. 

[Rain]

I went to RS today and regret it. I don't think I can stand to go back. Today they of course talked about the temple. Then it turned into a discussion about how we need to get the youth to go as often as possible. One mother spoke to say she takes her younger children to just go and touch the temple. I don't think this idol worship is right.

 

I'm not sure how that is idol worship?  It's not something I did with the kids, but I did have two children who did it on their own.  Those two children love going to the temple now.  

 

You heard my take.  The teacher was a sub, but did a fairly decent job.  Although we didn't get into the deep doctrine.  When do we ever.

 

How did your lesson go?  And Rain's lesson, if you're reading.   

 

Mine didn't have deep doctrine either, but really with the time and the available resources and the different levels of readiness I'm not sure how deep I could go into it.  I did have someone read one part of the manual and she just looked up and said, "I've never heard that before" and was just amazed.  The Spirit was pretty strong at the point so I suspect that the Spirit was teaching much more to some of the sisters than the book or I was.  I did suggest that they read more.

[mfbukowski]

I can go either way on this.

 

On one hand we have the Endowment and then we have the Presentation of the endowment (that difference  is made specifically) which changes while the Endowment does not.  It is totally obvious that the presentation changes at the will of the First Presidency and the Twelve, and who knows- even the temple department for all I know.

 

If we want to make that distinction as "ordinances" vs "rites" that is fine with me, but pretty clearly the church already calls one of those the "presentation of the endowment" and does not use the word "rite" instead.

 

For all I know- which is very little, perhaps the presentation of that last ordinance has been discontinued or is administered in another form.  For all I know all it might take is the prophet saying "Your exaltation is now authorized" to borrow language from another ordinance.

 

For all I know, it hasn't changed as is just done extremely privately.   But I do not believe the alleged contemporary accounts at all.

 

We don't know what we don't know and sometimes what we do know we can't discuss anyway, so who knows? 

Edited July 15, 2015 by mfbukowski

[cinepro]

After reading this thread, I was curious how the discussion would go in my EQ.  Then for some reason the teacher totally skipped that whole section. 

[JLHPROF]

On one hand we have the Endowment and then we have the Presentation of the endowment

 

Agreed, there is a difference.

 

 

(that difference  is made specifically) which changes while the Endowment does not.

 

Disagreed.  Far more than the presentation has been changed.

Edited July 15, 2015 by JLHPROF

[mfbukowski]

Agreed, there is a difference.

 

 

Disagreed.  Far more than the presentation has been changed.

Well that's a nice assertion and I could give you a cfr which you could not give and even then we would debate definitions of what was presentation and what was ordinance.

 

So I guess only God can tell us what blessings we are now losing because we have changed the ordinances or whether he is honoring the endowment anyway.

 

It's a slight epistemological problem to which only God knows the answer.

[Avatar4321]

It's interesting that all of this deeper discussion and teaching from president Benson didn't seem to be the focus of the lesson. At least not the one the Spirit taught in my quorum.

Things I noticed from the Spirit that was not part.of anything I prepared:

1) the sharing of how temples have influenced our lives and memories

2) how the temples help us be more like Christ.

3) how the temple helps us prepare our family to enter God's presence

We spent more time on that then most of the parts I found deep and interesting such as the melchizedek order