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

[JLHPROF]

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

 

The spiritual and the intellectual are two very different things.

For those who want intellectual information on the temple I can recommend some excellent books.

For those who are actually interested in the spiritual, they would recognize the need for preparation and keeping sacred things sacred.

Edited August 24, 2015 by JLHPROF

[The Unclean Deacon]

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

 

most of the temple can be discussed but I am doubtful you can do it here.

[Raingirl]

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

 

I am sorry that you are unable to understand my comment.  But perhaps you simply do not want to.

 

But not having the ability to understand some things does not relieve you of the responsibility to show respect for others and their beliefs. 

 

While you may not understand what the temple is all about, there is really nothing stopping you from respecting the fact what goes on in the temple IS sacred for members of the church and certain things are not discussed (nor videotaped, nor photographed) outside of the temple. Not even with other members.

 

Or is something only sacred in someone else's religion if YOU decide it is?

[mfbukowski]

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

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?

Yeah the person you said would be put off by it.

If you are genuinely seeking knowledge, knowing about the temple will induce you to explore further so you can learn-- not alienate you because it is "condescending".

If I told you you were not in a position right now to study some nuance of quantum physics, but you were a physics major and you know you would ge there eventually it might spur you on to want to learn more.

If you had no intention to learn more about physics and I told you the same thing, you would think I was calling you "dumb" and think I was condescending.

You thought it sounded condescending. Draw your own conclusions.

[strappinglad]

These ' videographers ' likely see themselves as courageous exposers of cultist activities. Might I suggest they do the same at the Masjid al-Haram during a Hajj. The most they will get from me for their sacrilege is a serious noogy and maybe a loud harrumph ....and they know it. Not so in Mecca.

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

I'm actually kinda grateful for the sneaks. Part of what got me interested in the Church was reading exposes of the Temple ceremony online. It's just free advertising.

[canard78]

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.

This would be an option for responding of course, but it's not going to encourage dialogue.

There's a lot that has been said anoint the endowment by prophets and leaders to allow a healthy discussion about the endowment with people who have been, not been or experienced it in a diluted "hidden camera" format.

I love the endowment dearly. I think the obsessive venerance and unwillingness to talk about it is unhealthy for both participants and potential participants.

There are some specific parts which are not to be revealed and keeping them as such has a great symbolic value to the individual. But there's lots more that could be discussed and has been by leaders that would allow for a positive and engaging discussion with curious onlookers and potential attendees.

[saemo]

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

Ha, nice try. As a MEMBER I asked, and got nothing but the, you'll know once you get there. The strangers coming in via TCP packets aren't going to be given a different answer than their own members.

[canard78]

most of the temple can be discussed but I am doubtful you can do it here.

I'm interested to know whether the moderators would allow discussion of specific elements if a leader has previously done so.

For example, President Benson openly discussed the four laws/themes in the endowment:

Celestial laws, embodied in certain ordinances belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ, are complied with by voluntary covenants. The laws are spiritual. Thus, our Father in Heaven has ordained certain holy sanctuaries, called temples, in which these laws may be fully explained, the laws include the law of obedience and sacrifice, the law of the gospel, the law of chastity, and the law of consecration.

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/ezra-taft-benson_vision-hope-youth-zion/

I've got a whole library of similar quotes from leaders. From those it would be possible to at least have a broad skeleton of content that, given it was mentioned first by the prophets, could viably be discussed by the members.

[HappyJackWagon]

While I don't condone secret recordings of sacred rituals being put out on the interwebs for anyone to view, listen to or read, it strikes me that we are entirely too afraid to talk about the temple. There are very few things we covenant not to talk about in the temple. The rest we avoid because we're so nervous about crossing the line we stay a mile away from the line. We do a poor job preparing people for the temple even though the vast majority of the information there can be taught directly from the scriptures. 

 

The implication that a person who asks questions about the temple isn't ready for that or is like a 5th grader is condescending and counterproductive. We can talk about a lot that happens in the temple. We just don't and its too bad.

[jkwilliams]

These ' videographers ' likely see themselves as courageous exposers of cultist activities. Might I suggest they do the same at the Masjid al-Haram during a Hajj. The most they will get from me for their sacrilege is a serious noogy and maybe a loud harrumph ....and they know it. Not so in Mecca.

 

I know only one guy who does this sort of thing, and he's generally just extremely angry at the church. Without looking at the link, I'm guessing he's the guy who shot the video. Not sure why, but he really does seem to hate the church, and I don't really have any interest in getting close enough to him to find out. IMO, hatred is never a good reason to do anything.

[thesometimesaint]

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

 

 

Short answer: Ask any questions you like. If appropriate for an Endowed member I'll answer it.

 

Long answer: If you want to know what the meaning of the elements of the ceremony really mean. Join the Church, learn all you can in that first year. Make an appointment with your Bishop and Stake President for a Temple Recommend. Answer the questions correctly. Then go yourself. Then you'll know for yourself.

[Kevin Christensen]

To better understand the Temple, go to the best books, the best informed scholars, rather than to low-grade gossips, exposees and sensationalizers, agenda-laden HBO episodes, and sound-bite traders.

For instance, Hugh Nibley's various temple books and essays, including Temple and Cosmos, One Eternal Round, and The Meaning of the Joseph Smith Papyri.

A few essays to start:

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1086&index=1

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=2246&index=22

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1123&index=6

You could even start with "What is a Temple?"

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1104&index=9

Welch is very helpful as well:

http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/book/the-sermon-at-the-temple-and-the-sermon-on-the-mount/

I often find non-LDS approaches very helpful, even sometimes when undertaken with no thought to LDS experience. Mircea Eliade's Cosmos and History: The Myth of Eternal Return.

Joseph Campbell's The Power of Myth is also helpful and relevant.

Margaret Barker's Temple Theology has great relevance, including essays like "Belonging in the Temple."

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/default.htm

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/OurGreatHighPriest.pdf

And the thoughtful and insightful member Blake Ostler's recent Fire on the Horizon, which he describes as a mediation on the endowment.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburgh, PA

[Kenngo1969]

Whoa, you've done some serious gauntlet-throwing-down there, Brother Christensen.  I wonder, is Erik/Five Solas gonna pick up that gauntlet and run with it?

[Avatar4321]

We don't talk about the temple enough???? What church are you going to?

[volgadon]

When the young Gershom Scholem arrived in Jerusalem, he already had an impressive command of kabbalistic texts. He decided to study Kabbalah under a living master, though he had probably read many manuscripts that no Jerusalem Kabbalist had ever seen. He went to the Beit El yeshiva (the name is not without relevance to the topic at hand) which had been in existence for two hundred years. Scholem spoke with the venerable master Gershon Vilner who agreed to accept him as a student under one condition: that he ask no questions. Scholem could not do that. He left, and never learned to experience Kabbalah as a living phenomenon. The reason I share this story is that some forms of learning are experiential, and the meaning cannot be conveyed otherwise. The same with the temple. You can read the endowment script all you like, but if you miss the experiential, parabolic aspect, then you are left with nothing more than a few superficialities. We can tell you that there is an experience, but we cannot convey the content of the experience to you. There are no words capable of doing so. What we can say about the temple is that we set ourselves apart from the mundane and worldly through a deepened baptismal ritual. We then continue to a higher plane of holiness by washings and anointings. The endowment uses a symbolic account of the creation and the fall of Adam and Eve to teach us how to discern between good and evil, and darkness and light, and how to recognise God's revelation from counterfeit revelations. It is more or less a mystery play, and you can read plenty of those. The clothes we wear are symbolic, and entirely different to anything we wear day to day. A higher degree of holiness requires a higher degree of commitment, so we make covenants, and we receive signs and tokens as part of the process. That, I think I both detailed and vague enough.

[HappyJackWagon]

We don't talk about the temple enough???? What church are you going to?

Not sure who you're talking to but I'll answer.

 

We talk about how we should be worthy and how we should go to the temple regularly. We talk about family history work and doing the work for our ancestors. What we don't talk about is what we actually do inside the temple. We don't do a good job discussing the initiatory, the endowment or the sealing in anything more than a surface level mention so that everyone who "really knows" can nod their heads knowingly. We don't talk about the specific covenants we make inside but rather refer ambiguously to our "covenants" as a nebulous, all encompassing description of everything we do inside the temple. We also don't talk about the second annointing. Or maybe your ward is much different than mine.

[ERayR]

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.

It is ritual to be experienced in a sacred and serene setting where communion with deity is much more probable.

[KevinG]

When friends honestly and sincerely come to me with questions about what they heard or read, I try to respond charitably.  When people on the internet try to bait me into sounding condescending or conspiratorial by asking me how I respond to those who have seen the endowment on line I usually roll my eyes, then try to respond charitably.

 

So here goes...

 

There are many things we can discuss about the Temple without revealing sacred covenants, sacred temple rites, or other things we have been asked to keep to ourselves by covenant.

 

I can discuss how the temple teaches using symbolism, that there are reasons those symbols might not make sense out of context of being a seasoned Latter-day Saint, that we ask even the faithful to be in good standing for at least a year before entering so the covenants made are understood and more secure, that we teach the Gospel, and most of the endowment reviews basic gospel topics, that some of the symbolism used may be derived from other sources like Masonic ritual, ancient books, etc, but that the purpose is to remind us of our covenants to God despite the specific symbols, that the symbols have changed through the years to better speak to modern audiences (for example some symbolism that resonated with a 19th century agrarian audience might be offputting for a 21st century suburbanite, so the symbols we use today to convey the same seriousness have changed).

 

Usually sincere people who are not out to play gotcha! will respect and understand the idea that we have symbolic teachings that represent sacred things, especially our relationship with and obedience to God the Father and Jesus Christ.  While those symbols may seem strange, especially out of context of a believing and indoctrinated Saint, they are designed to bring us unto Christ, and recommit us to building the Kingdom of God on earth.

 

Or I send them here: https://www.lds.org/church/temples?lang=eng

[ERayR]

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

 

Not really.  The difference is in the differing concept of sacredness.  There are sacred covenants and blessings embedded in the temple ordinances.  To receive those blessings sacred covenants are made.  Restricting access to those who have prepared themselves is a protection for those who have not made such preparation.

[ERayR]

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

 

Everyone can have that comparison in some area of their knowledge.  I have two degrees and a professional licensing achievement that is difficult to attain but alas when it comes to nuclear physics I am but a first grader.  NO shame involved it is just that I have not prepared myself in that field.

 

A college education does not necessarily prepare you for spiritual experiences.

[Ahab]

I simply don't play the "how much can I tell them without telling them too much" game. It's just too personal/sacred to me to even want to try to put it into words, which are not only inadequate but too excruciating to try to come up with. It just doesn't work.

Even when my Mom asked me about it I just told her that it wasn't something I could put into words because it was such a personal and sacred experience for me.

If you or anyone else can't relate to that, as if you think you may not have ever experienced anything that personal or sacred to you, then all I can say is that it's not something that I can convey to you. It is simply beyond my own power to convey.

[KevinG]

Invite them to get baptized, live as a faithful Saint for a year, then see for themselves.

 

(Yes I've done this before...)

 

[ERayR]

I simply don't play the "how much can I tell them without telling them too much" game. It's just too personal/sacred to me to even want to try to put it into words, which are not only inadequate but too excruciating to try to come up with. It just doesn't work.

Even when my Mom asked me about it I just told her that it wasn't something I could put into words because it was such a personal and sacred experience for me.

If you or anyone else can't relate to that, as if you think you may not have ever experienced anything that personal or sacred to you, then all I can say is that it's not something that I can convey to you. It is simply beyond my own power to convey.

 

And not to mention they are very personal and very related to your own personal understanding.

[HappyJackWagon]

I simply don't play the "how much can I tell them without telling them too much" game. It's just too personal/sacred to me to even want to try to put it into words, which are not only inadequate but too excruciating to try to come up with. It just doesn't work.

 

Sorry. This seems like a total cop out. Although I see how this approach could get me out of doing missionary work. "The gospel is just too personal and is so sacred to me that I can't put it into words, so I'm not going to try."

 

Ahab, I like you, but this is taking the easy way out.