Theology & The L D S Temple – Now That They Know, How Will You Answer?

[Five Solas]

The point of this thread isn’t to discuss the particulars of the LDS temple and the practices therein.  And I’m not generally in favor of people being recorded without their knowledge.  But whether content is secret (e.g., government documents disclosed via “WikiLeaks”) or sacred (temple content, in the eyes of believing LDS)—the internet seems an irresistible magnet that sooner or later makes pretty much everything accessible on the broadest imaginable scale.

 

I recently watched a video recorded inside an LDS temple on YouTube (I’ve watched a few things related to LDS, mostly debates between LDS and evangelical Christians & its all-knowing algorithm made a recommendation).  What struck me most were the theological implications of the content I was hearing.  Having never been “endowed” it quickly became evident to me that there’s a bit more to LDS doctrine than what gets discussed in church or on message boards.  There appears to be another layer to it I really don’t know much about.  But perhaps if I did understand it better--it would help me to better understand extended family members who carry a “temple recommend card.”

 

So I’d like to ask some questions about it and have dialogue with those who adhere to such things.  Obviously I can’t do it here.  But the bigger question (and no doubt better discussion) is this: Thanks to the internet, lots more people are going to get familiar with temple content, including investigators and membership candidates.  They’ll have questions about what they’ve seen & heard.  There will need to be answers.  Simply condemning the posters (or the viewers) of such content will be inadequate.

 

What should the response be?

 

--Erik
 

[JLHPROF]

What should the response be?

 

I answer with my usual response to such questions:

 

 

"Even though everyone may discover what goes on in the temple, and many have already revealed it, the important thing is that I do not reveal these things; they must remain sacred to me. I must preserve a zone of sanctity which cannot be violated whether or not anyone else in the room has the remotest idea what the situation really is ...

"No matter what happens, it will, then, always remain secret: only I know exactly the weight and force of the covenants I have made -- I and the Lord with whom I have made them -- unless I choose to reveal them. If I do not, then they are secret and sacred no matter what others may say or do. Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them, and therefore that person has not given them away. You cannot reveal what you do not know!"

 

Hugh Nibley - one of his best quotes.

[Calm]

There is a difference between watching an experience and living it.  There are somethings that cannot be taught through observing.  The temple experience is one of those...not only because learning requires all the context of the preparation that it took to get there and the teachings one receives along the way from the Spirit, but because spiritual learning is a 'being' experience and not a 'book learning' one.   Plus there is the relationship one has with others of the LDS faith community as one watches their lives and then later participates in one's own covenants and then includes how one has seen others experience the blessings and revelations that come from the covenants...it is a multilayered, very complex lesson to be learned that isn't even finished in this lifetime.  

 

Anyone who watches it online is being shortchanged and is likely to be misled on what it being taught because the most important aspects for the individual won't be there for them.

 

If one wants to understand the scriptural and doctrinal context, one can learn that outside the temple as well as within.  I don't think there is anything taught within the walls in that sense that I haven't also been taught outside of it.  What is missing is the realization of its importance and eternal meaning in a new way that I received in the temple once I was prepared in my understanding through long lessons from the Spirit and others.

 

It is like observing someone having a baby and going through it oneself.  Guys will have to come up with an all emcompassing parallel themselves, I don't know if fatherhood is quite the same...babymaking is the closest thing I can think of given its totality of experience, preparation to pregnancy, to delivery and then watching over the results for decades and then finally being able to sit back and smile and watch the process start all over again for one's child.

Edited August 24, 2015 by calmoriah

[mfbukowski]

Watching it on a computer is quite different than the experience and experiencing it a few hundred times is what it takes to start understanding it anyway.  There are layers of meaning you will never notice even watching it over and over.  It's like understanding that a biblical prophecy applies to many different historical situations- the second coming is the same as the fall of Jerusalem, is the same as a personal fall from grace, is the same as...... etc etc.  Like reading scripture you see more and more each time you experience it, on different days with different thoughts in your head etc.   It is not straight informational content.

 

So no, "it" is not on the internet at all.

 

It is not content to be viewed.  It is not even informational.  It is like viewing a painting or a piece of sculpture or reading a book and seeing meaning you never imagined was there before.  It is a symphony of sight sounds and words.  It is no more information than Beethoven's Ninth is a discourse on nature.   So watch it all you like.  You will not understand it anyway.

Edited August 24, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Five Solas]

So you're just going to tell them they couldn't have understood what they heard/saw?  Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending, JLHPROF?

 

--Erik

 

PS.  The term "begging the question" gets misused a lot.  But herein Nibley provides an example applicable to proper use: "Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them..."

[CV75]

What should the response be?

It depends on the question, but in any case with charity.

[mfbukowski]

There is a difference between watching an experience and living it.  There are somethings that cannot be taught through observing.  The temple experience is one of those...not only because learning requires all the context of the preparation that it took to get there and the teachings one receives along the way from the Spirit, but because spiritual learning is a 'being' experience and not a 'book learning' one.   Plus there is the relationship one has with others of the LDS faith community as one watches their lives and then later participates in one's own covenants and then includes how one has seen others experience the blessings and revelations that come from the covenants...it is a multilayered, very complex lesson to be learned that isn't even finished in this lifetime.  

 

Anyone who watches it online is being shortchanged and is likely to be misled on what it being taught because the most important aspects for the individual won't be there for them.

 

If one wants to understand the scriptural and doctrinal context, one can learn that outside the temple as well as within.  I don't think there is anything taught within the walls in that sense that I haven't also been taught outside of it.  What is missing is the realization of its importance and eternal meaning in a new way that I received in the temple once I was prepared in my understanding through long lessons from the Spirit and others.

Oh my gosh.  I was typing mine as you were posting yours----  great minds....

[mfbukowski]

So you're just going to tell them they couldn't have understood what they heard/saw?  Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending, JLHPROF?

 

--Erik

 

PS.  The term "begging the question" gets misused a lot.  But herein Nibley provides an example applicable to proper use: "Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them..."

True investigators know they can get there, just like a freshman in college knows he will graduate some day and become a professor himself perhaps if he wants to.   And if it puts them off, so be it.  It is not for everyone.

[mfbukowski]

David O McKay, it is said, at an advanced age and as prophet, said to the 12, "Brethren, I am just beginning to understand the endowment".

 

I am not too worried.  I have probably experienced it 8 or 900 times and pretty much have it memorized.  I learn more each time I experience it.  It is inexhaustible.

[Calm]

So you're just going to tell them they couldn't have understood what they heard/saw?  Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending....

I would not expect to understand the experience of a Catholic mass or baptism just because I've observed it, read the Catechism and discussed it in depth with my Catholic friends.  I am lacking the essential part that connects me to the experience as more than just an observer of a dance.  I need belief or at least hope to really experience anything that is founded in faith.

 

One can even observe parachuting from the viewpoint of the skydiver these days with cameras attached to their helmets.  Do you really think though the experience of watching the recording is anything like actually jumping out of the plane and falling?  Is there any moment of fear, any need for commitment, any risk, any cost?  If not, then how can one say it is anything close to the reality...all one is viewing is the shell and the 'out there', nothing of what is really happening to the individual which is all internal.  The important parts are hidden away for only those willing to pay the cost, take the risk, to commit themselves fully and jump.

Edited August 24, 2015 by calmoriah

[CV75]

Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending

If that is the direction the conversation seems to be taking, the first layer of explanation, which also seems to demystify the whole thing, is to tie the questions/answers to a Biblical reference, which can easily be done. Offering that perspective makes for a short series of questions and possibly an invitation to read the Book of Mormon.

[JLHPROF]

So you're just going to tell them they couldn't have understood what they heard/saw?  Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending, JLHPROF?

 

Mfbukowski, CV75 and Cal have already answered what I would have said.

 

It is not condescending to not expect a 5th grader to comprehend calculus on the first day of school.

It is not condescending to express the idea that there are elements of understanding the mechanics that cannot be learned by observation - I am still learning more every time I experience the temple.

It is not condescending to recognize that a truly sacred experience should not be discussed with those who did not partake of it.

 

The temple doctrine is exactly what "pearls before swine" references.

[rpn]

Faithful members do not talk about their temple experiences.   But there is a manual published by the church, available on line, that does teach about what happens in the temple.  https://www.lds.org/manual/endowed-from-on-high-temple-preparation-seminar-teachers-manual?lang=eng  And you can also read the LDS scriptures which teach LDS doctrine.    Your questions will be largely answered there.  

 

Perhaps if you were to ask your question without reference to the temple itself, you would find that members would be happy to answer, as what you ask is not that which is only taught inside a temple.

[Five Solas]

I would not expect to understand the experience of a Catholic mass or baptism just because I've observed it, read the Catechism and discussed it in depth with my Catholic friends. 

Therein lies a huge difference between your example (Catholic practice) and mine (LDS practice).  You're Catholic friends would be more than happy to discuss with you whatever it was you saw at Mass or read in the Catechism.  My LDS friends and relatives will be aghast to know I'd watched a video recorded in their temple--and the contents therein would be the last thing they'd be willing to discuss me.  Indeed, if I were to bring up details on this very board--I wouldn't have posting privileges for long. 

 

Seems like a funny comparison you've made.

 

--Erik

[Avatar4321]

First, I find the attempts to poison the well by suggesting we would just condemn anyone who asks the question as quite telling.

Second, I would invite them to come to the temple when they are ready and see for themselves.

[Calm]

Then go back to the baby making example.  Most men and women would not take it too kindly if you invited yourself in to watch it from beginning to end, especially the conception part and the delivery.

[Raingirl]

Therein lies a huge difference between your example (Catholic practice) and mine (LDS practice).  You're Catholic friends would be more than happy to discuss with you whatever it was you saw at Mass or read in the Catechism.  My LDS friends and relatives will be aghast to know I'd watched a video recorded in their temple--and the contents therein would be the last thing they'd be willing to discuss me.  Indeed, if I were to bring up details on this very board--I wouldn't have posting privileges for long. 

 

Seems like a funny comparison you've made.

 

--Erik

 

Actually, it is you who makes the odd comparison in this post.

 

Discussing what goes on in a Catholic Mass as compared to what goes on in Sacrament meeting would be the correct comparison.   There would be no issues with that.

 

There is no prohibition against recording a Catholic Mass - indeed you can always find the Pope celebrating Christmas Mass televised each year.  So Catholics should have no issue with that.

 

Recording and picture taking are not allowed inside the temple.  This is not the shocking, subversive thing you are trying to make it out to be.  I converted from Judaism and filming and picture taking were not allowed during services in even the most liberal synagogues.

 

But I guess something is less titillating for certain people if they can't redefine something that is truly sacred as "secret" instead.  That says far more about the person complaining than anything else.

[Tacenda]

I would not expect to understand the experience of a Catholic mass or baptism just because I've observed it, read the Catechism and discussed it in depth with my Catholic friends. I am lacking the essential part that connects me to the experience as more than just an observer of a dance. I need belief or at least hope to really experience anything that is founded in faith.

One can even observe parachuting from the viewpoint of the skydiver these days with cameras attached to their helmets. Do you really think though the experience of watching the recording is anything like actually jumping out of the plane and falling? Is there any moment of fear, any need for commitment, any risk, any cost? If not, then how can one say it is anything close to the reality...all one is viewing is the shell and the 'out there', nothing of what is really happening to the individual which is all internal. The important parts are hidden away for only those willing to pay the cost, take the risk, to commit themselves fully and jump.

True, I've been to a Catholic funeral and a wedding. It's the unfamiliarity to things and not having the understanding. When I first took out my endowment it was totally different but I just went with it since it seemed so normal for everyone and the right thing to do. If I'd felt a dark feeling or creepy feeling I don't think it would have gone well at all, the opposite was true, there again it's the 'goodness in people vibe' that keep me in. Or their light. Edited August 24, 2015 by Tacenda

[Calm]

I wonder how many would be mystified  if anger was expressed by tribe members because tourists invited themselves to see rites many of the tribe felt should be reserved for only them

[Ahab]

There are only a few things we agree to not reveal to others, even if those others are also members who have gone through the temple, and the rest of it is just too personal/sacred for me to even want to try to explain to others, so if anyone asked me anything about the temple that I didn't feel comfortable sharing with them I would just tell them that it's very personal/sacred to me and I don't feel comfortable talking about it.

That's it. End of explanation. And if they didn't like the fact that I didn't talk about it with them then that would be their personal problem.

[Storm Rider]

The point of this thread isn’t to discuss the particulars of the LDS temple and the practices therein.  And I’m not generally in favor of people being recorded without their knowledge.  But whether content is secret (e.g., government documents disclosed via “WikiLeaks”) or sacred (temple content, in the eyes of believing LDS)—the internet seems an irresistible magnet that sooner or later makes pretty much everything accessible on the broadest imaginable scale.

 

I recently watched a video recorded inside an LDS temple on YouTube (I’ve watched a few things related to LDS, mostly debates between LDS and evangelical Christians & its all-knowing algorithm made a recommendation).  What struck me most were the theological implications of the content I was hearing.  Having never been “endowed” it quickly became evident to me that there’s a bit more to LDS doctrine than what gets discussed in church or on message boards.  There appears to be another layer to it I really don’t know much about.  But perhaps if I did understand it better--it would help me to better understand extended family members who carry a “temple recommend card.”

 

So I’d like to ask some questions about it and have dialogue with those who adhere to such things.  Obviously I can’t do it here.  But the bigger question (and no doubt better discussion) is this: Thanks to the internet, lots more people are going to get familiar with temple content, including investigators and membership candidates.  They’ll have questions about what they’ve seen & heard.  There will need to be answers.  Simply condemning the posters (or the viewers) of such content will be inadequate.

 

What should the response be?

 

--Erik

 

Hello Erik,

 

The Internet will be a source of information for all things if one seeks for specific knowledge.  

 

The way that I would answer the question is that there are some things that I feel comfortable discussing and other things, due to my personal covenants, that I will not be able to discuss.  Questions are not to be feared, particularly sincere questions.  I choose not to discuss the temple with anyone that asks; it really depends on the individual and what I sense is the motivation for their questions.  Does that make sense?

[Five Solas]

Actually, it is you who makes the odd comparison in this post.

I'm not going to take credit where it's not due, Raingirl.  Suggest you read calmoriah's post (#10) to see where the Catholic comparison originates on the thread.

:0)

 

--Erik

[Russell C McGregor]

So you're just going to tell them they couldn't have understood what they heard/saw?  Do you think there's any risk you'll put potential investigators off by sounding condescending, JLHPROF?

 

--Erik

It's more tactful than saying that those whose morality doesn't prevent them from accepting stolen information, and turning the sacred observances of others into a spectator sport just because they are too bigoted to respect the sanctity of those observances, don't deserve to understand them.

Even though it would be true.

 

PS.  The term "begging the question" gets misused a lot.  But herein Nibley provides an example applicable to proper use: "Anyone who would reveal these things has not understood them..."

No. He does not.

[Five Solas]

...

It is not condescending to not expect a 5th grader to comprehend calculus...

But it just might be to compare a college-educated adult to a 5th grader...

 

Interesting approach you take to the question, JLHPROF

;0)

 

--Erik

[Five Solas]

True investigators know they can get there, just like a freshman in college knows he will graduate some day and become a professor himself perhaps if he wants to.   And if it puts them off, so be it.  It is not for everyone.

You're collecting a lot of reputation points for this post, mfbukowski.  And it might merit its own thread--but for the uninitiated, what exactly is a "true investigator?"  Are their multiple sorts of LDS investigator? 

 

--Erik