There's more endowment?

[Stargazer]

16 hours ago, cdowis said:

There is nothing in the scriptural creation accounts about shaking hands. 

We weren't talking about scriptural creation accounts, but about the one in the temple.

[Robert F. Smith]

20 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

Well, yes, I guess I should be more clear.  I am not necessarily thinking that there needs to be something more produced here in the latter-days--although wouldn't that be super cool, although as someone mentioned we can't even live the first one.  I guess I have in the back of my mind the moment when the persons who put together the Old Testament (long about 600 bce?), what they understood and were thinking when they included Genesis, and I am saying, it is entirely temple drama, from the first word to the last.  Now, a second question would be, did they understand it that way at that point, or were they simply dealing with ancient records or ideas of which they did not.

But that's the back of the mind.

The front of the mind is--I consider that the Adam and Eve initiation (which we present currently in our temples as the only endowment) to be a MAP for PROGRESSION.  And I am saying, what if the rest of Genesis is the rest of the map?  There's more map!

This is a perfect example of a node on the map of progression as given in Genesis:  the wrestle with the angel before receiving the blessing.  It's something we all need to know, all pass through, and it is delivered in that template (now called Genesis).

....................................................................

There are many instances of the endowment rite to be found in and out of Holy Writ down through time, usually characterized by washing,. anointing, and covenant, the details often  merely alluded to.  The liturgical sequences involved can take many forms, and some apply to particular sacred occasions.  This also applies to even more ancient texts, as with the New Year Creation Ritual Enuma elish, celebrated annually at temples in Babylon and Asshur -- at the Akitu Festival.

The liturgical and literary structures often go together, as one can see by reading Gary A. Rendsburg, The Redaction of Genesis, 2nd ed.  (Eisenbrauns, 2014), or "Redactional Structuring in the Joseph Story: Genesis 37 - 50," in Mappings of the Biblical Terrain (Bucknell Univ, 1990).

However, even though ritual or liturgical texts can be found in Genesis and in Mosiah, etc., they are not all endowment rites.  There are many other types of rituals and holy festivals to be celebrated.  King Benjamin's Speech in Mosiah 2 - 5, for example, is an annual covenant renewal rite and coregency rite taking place at the regular Fall Jewish pilgrimage festival.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

The 2nd anointing is sometimes called the 2nd endowment. Is that what you were asking about?

If so, there seems to be plenty of historical documentation to show that it does exist and was practiced regularly in the past. Knowledge of the current use of the 2nd anointing/endowment relies on less reliable sources yet it seems clear to me that it is a continuing practice, though on a much smaller scale.

I find it very hard to believe that a temple president wouldn't be aware of this. IIRC those who receive it covenant never to discuss it. If that is accurate, then it would be really hard to trust a temple president who likely had received it since he would likely be one of the officiators in the ordinance when it occurs in that particular temple.

Good points, but I knew these men pretty well and they did not flinch or look away etc, when answering.  I had the sense that they were telling the truth.  My sense is that if it is still practiced it is practiced at a level above the local one.  Even sealers are set apart by an apostle if I am not mistaken, and I have known of some who have gone to SLC to have the ordinance performed.

But yes, you could be right, I am certainly not going to debate it because the evidence is scanty except from unreliable sources who have left the church.  They could be making  up anything. 

[mfbukowski]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Jolhn Dehilin and others have spoken about these Second Anointings with great glee, but the notion that one cannot apostatize after receiving them is just nonsense.

And there is just a little epistemological problem with all those sources- they are in fact apostates by definition if they have revealed it.

[Stargazer]

12 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Yet somehow Jacob managed to physically "wrestle" with an angel before Christ's resurrection.
Somebody had a physical body and presence sufficient to put a hip out of joint.

Of course that depends on what we think wrestle means...

D&C 129, on the two types of beings in heaven:

1 There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected 
personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—
2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have.
3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, 
but inherit the same glory.

Seems that Jacob's wrestling partner must have been one of those aforementioned angels/resurrected beings.

As for what I was talking about, this would be the test mentioned in verses 4-9 of that section.

[cdowis]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

We weren't talking about scriptural creation accounts, but about the one in the temple.

I suggest we stay away from a discussion of the details of the temple endowment presentation.  I believe it violates board guidelines.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Good points, but I knew these men pretty well and they did not flinch or look away etc, when answering.  I had the sense that they were telling the truth.  My sense is that if it is still practiced it is practiced at a level above the local one.  Even sealers are set apart by an apostle if I am not mistaken, and I have known of some who have gone to SLC to have the ordinance performed.

But yes, you could be right, I am certainly not going to debate it because the evidence is scanty except from unreliable sources who have left the church.  They could be making  up anything.

I assume you mean the evidence for current practice of a second endowment is scanty (I would agree).  But the evidence for the existence of a second endowment is beyond question historically speaking.

And I think it is definitely above the local level.  Not sure even a temple president gets all the info on it.  GA's and those receiving the blessing would be my guess.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, cdowis said:

I suggest we stay away from a discussion of the details of the temple endowment presentation.  I believe it violates board guidelines.

Which is why the temple endowment is such a shock to many members the first time.
We know what we covenant to keep sacred.  It isn't the entirety of what goes on in the temple.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

D&C 129, on the two types of beings in heaven:

1 There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected 
personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—
2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have.
3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, 
but inherit the same glory.

Seems that Jacob's wrestling partner must have been one of those aforementioned angels/resurrected beings.

As for what I was talking about, this would be the test mentioned in verses 4-9 of that section.

Yes, and that "wrestle" is a standard ritual act which regularly takes place at the veil in LDS temples.

[JLHPROF]

9 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and that "wrestle" is a standard ritual act which regularly takes place at the veil in LDS temples.

What Nibley calls "the sacred embrace".

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Stargazer said:

D&C 129, on the two types of beings in heaven:

1 There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected 
personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—
2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and 
bones, as ye see me have.
3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, 
but inherit the same glory.

Seems that Jacob's wrestling partner must have been one of those aforementioned angels/resurrected beings.

As for what I was talking about, this would be the test mentioned in verses 4-9 of that section.

And since Christ was the first on this earth to be resurrected, whoever Jacob wrestled was a resurrected being from a previous world - probably Heavenly Father himself.

[cdowis]

52 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

And since Christ was the first on this earth to be resurrected, whoever Jacob wrestled was a resurrected being from a previous world - probably Heavenly Father himself.

Or from the city of Zion.  Similar to the Three Nephites.

[clarkgoble]

15 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I have asked two temple presidents so far about a second endowment- if it exists, and both have said they know nothing about it.  I believe them.

Will more be revealed?  I think it is known that there WILL of necessity be more revelation because we do not have needed ordinances yet- like the keys to resurrection etc.

But I think you are not asking that question?  Like maybe we are to liken the story of Noah to us in the same way we relate the Adam and Eve story?

I don't want to say too much since I fear comments along these lines might have been what shut down the prior thread that got into these issues. (I wish moderators would explain why a thread is shut down) I'd just say my personal opinion is that there's an ordinance administered directly by divine beings that is what I consider the second endowment. I don't believe it's administered by mortals. While I don't think it happens for most in this life, I think it can and is the origin of heavenly ascent narratives. I think there are strong clues that both Nephi and John experienced this - in particular the interspersion in Rev 2-3.

As you note there are things we have to receive to be resurrected. In part, the endowment shows us in a general way how to do it and perhaps offer a hint of recollection of things prior to our birth. But being able to do it and leave the spirit world is an other thing entirely. The second thing I'd say, and I'll be very, very vague here, is that there's a lot to do with naming and receiving the name of God. Kevin Christiansen has written some interesting things on this using Margaret Baker's work. And of course heavenly ascent literature especially those featuring Enoch receiving the new name of Metatron and becoming the Lesser YHWH such as in 3 Enoch give some clues even if we consider them corrupt and not fully to be trusted.  

[clarkgoble]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and that "wrestle" is a standard ritual act which regularly takes place at the veil in LDS temples.

A good paper on this "Jacob in the Presence of God" by Andrew Skinner from the Sperry Symposium a few years back. Surprisingly a variant on this that was still fairly explicit was in the Ensign. Hopefully if we're discussing something that made it into the Ensign and is up on a BYU page the moderators will moderate their moderation. As both papers note, Joseph Smith talked about this pretty clearly. Many of Joseph's ideas arose partially out of masonry. A good paper on this is "Freemasonry and the Origins of Modern Temple Ordinances" over at the Interpreter. Quoting from that:

Quote

Those familiar with the Bible will also recall relevant temple symbolism in the story of Jacob. Speaking of Jacob’s dream of the heavenly ladder in Genesis 28, Elder Marion G. Romney said: “Jacob [Page 179]realized that the covenants he made with the Lord were the rungs on the ladder that he himself would have to climb in order to obtain the promised blessings — blessings that would entitle him to enter heaven and associate with the Lord.”¹³⁹ Thus, in what may be a deliberate play on similar teachings in Freemasonry, the Prophet Joseph Smith correlated the “three principal rounds of Jacob’s ladder” with “the telestial, the terrestrial, and the celestial glories or kingdoms.”¹⁴⁰ Later Jacob wrestled (or embraced, as this may also be understood¹⁴¹) an angel who, after a series of questions and answers in a place that Jacob named Peniel (Hebrew “face of God”), gave him a new name.¹⁴²

 

[Maidservant]

2 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and that "wrestle" is a standard ritual act which regularly takes place at the veil in LDS temples.

 

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

What Nibley calls "the sacred embrace".

Beautiful.  I hadn't really noticed to correspond that, so that's great; I'll ponder more on it.  I do think that our angel is this earth life (i.e. ourselves/body), and we wrestle it for our blessing.

 

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

I'd just say my personal opinion is that there's an ordinance administered directly by divine beings that is what I consider the second endowment. I don't believe it's administered by mortals. While I don't think it happens for most in this life, I think it can and is the origin of heavenly ascent narratives. I think there are strong clues that both Nephi and John experienced this - in particular the interspersion in Rev 2-3.

As you note there are things we have to receive to be resurrected. In part, the endowment shows us in a general way how to do it and perhaps offer a hint of recollection of things prior to our birth. But being able to do it and leave the spirit world is an other thing entirely. The second thing I'd say, and I'll be very, very vague here, is that there's a lot to do with naming and receiving the name of God. Kevin Christiansen has written some interesting things on this using Margaret Baker's work. And of course heavenly ascent literature especially those featuring Enoch receiving the new name of Metatron and becoming the Lesser YHWH such as in 3 Enoch give some clues even if we consider them corrupt and not fully to be trusted.  

Beautiful.  I do think it is fascinating how we each have our own revelations on temple and scripture.  That's how it's meant to be.  There's no way for it all to match up.  But the Lord is our teacher.

When you mention the spirit world, I think that's a lovely take on it, but I will mention that I don't see the journey as something post-death except for those who can't manage to overcome (D&C 76) in this lifetime, which is nearly everyone of course.  It's not a pre-death, post-death thing to me at all.  It is not a spatial journey to me--like journeying from place to place.  It's a journey of overcoming and becoming that new creature--wherever and whenever it takes place.  That the signs and tokens that Brigham Young speaks of as being necessary to pass the angels are SHOWN IN LIVING. That is, it is oil in the lamp that you have to 'buy' yourself--no one can give you. For example, becoming clean.  Forgiving.  Refraining from shedding blood.  Becoming one with your husband or wife.  Etc.  It's a process and that process can be spoken of as "passing by the angels", but it's really just us living and becoming exalted, step by step, in realtime.

I also have felt like the endowment IS the vision of Moses and etc, made ordinary for everyone.  But perhaps there's something else available as well.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

A good paper on this "Jacob in the Presence of God" by Andrew Skinner from the Sperry Symposium a few years back. Surprisingly a variant on this that was still fairly explicit was in the Ensign. Hopefully if we're discussing something that made it into the Ensign and is up on a BYU page the moderators will moderate their moderation. As both papers note, Joseph Smith talked about this pretty clearly. Many of Joseph's ideas arose partially out of masonry. A good paper on this is "Freemasonry and the Origins of Modern Temple Ordinances" over at the Interpreter. Quoting from that:

Quote

 

Those familiar with the Bible will also recall relevant temple symbolism in the story of Jacob. Speaking of Jacob’s dream of the heavenly ladder in Genesis 28, Elder Marion G. Romney said: “Jacob [Page 179]realized that the covenants he made with the Lord were the rungs on the ladder that he himself would have to climb in order to obtain the promised blessings — blessings that would entitle him to enter heaven and associate with the Lord.”¹³⁹ Thus, in what may be a deliberate play on similar teachings in Freemasonry, the Prophet Joseph Smith correlated the “three principal rounds of Jacob’s ladder” with “the telestial, the terrestrial, and the celestial glories or kingdoms.”¹⁴⁰ Later Jacob wrestled (or embraced, as this may also be understood¹⁴¹) an angel who, after a series of questions and answers in a place that Jacob named Peniel (Hebrew “face of God”), gave him a new name.

 

The word Shelem at Ether 3:1  is  the name of a mount “because of its exceeding height,” and this is probably related to Ugaritic slm “stairs.”[1], Hebrew-Arabic sūllam “ladder, stairway; elevation” (Genesis 28:12 “stairway” to “heaven”),[2] cognate with Akkadian simmiltu “stairway,”as in simmelat šamāmi “stairs of heaven.”[3]

[1] G. del Olmo Lete, Canaanite Religion, 2nd ed., 239,364 and n.95.

[2] H. Nibley, Lehi in the Desert and the World of the Jaredites, 2nd ed., CWHN V:242.

[3] HALOT, II:757; Tawil, Akkadian Lexical Companion, 263; CAD “S” 273-274.

 

[Maidservant]

4 hours ago, cdowis said:

I suggest we stay away from a discussion of the details of the temple endowment presentation.  I believe it violates board guidelines.

Yes, I agree.  Thank you.  And there should be no need to.  I am trying to discuss scripture only.  Or the map of progression and where we might find it.  But not the details of what we have now.

I'm not even trying to discuss whether there is more endowment of any kind (which is unclear because of my post title), but whether the Old Testament records beyond the Adam Eve template are also templates for progression.

But I learned a lot here, cool!

[Stargazer]

 

12 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I assume you mean the evidence for current practice of a second endowment is scanty (I would agree).  But the evidence for the existence of a second endowment is beyond question historically speaking.

And I think it is definitely above the local level.  Not sure even a temple president gets all the info on it.  GA's and those receiving the blessing would be my guess.

A search on lds.org for the phrase "second anointing" yields only the following in Chapter 19 of the Doctrines of the Gospel teacher manual:

Quote

Caution: Exercise caution while discussing the doctrine of having our calling and election made sure. Avoid speculation. Use only the sources given here and in the student manual. Do not attempt in any way to discuss or answer questions about the second anointing.

 

This is excellent advice for a teacher in a church classroom. Virtually nothing is  known about this ordinance, and even those who have received it may not offer details, or even acknowledge that they've received it. So there's little point in discussing it here.

 

Edited August 19, 2017 by Stargazer

[SteveO]

While I agree with the idea of the account of Genesis being a temple drama, I believe Joseph reported seeing both the personages of Adam and Eve in vision?  So they were actual people, but their account is a metaphor?  How do we reconcile the two?

[JLHPROF]

8 hours ago, Stargazer said:

 Virtually nothing is  known about this ordinance, and even those who have received it may not offer details, or even acknowledge that they've received it. So there's little point in discussing it here.

Completely untrue.

[JLHPROF]

7 hours ago, SteveO said:

While I agree with the idea of the account of Genesis being a temple drama, I believe Joseph reported seeing both the personages of Adam and Eve in vision?  So they were actual people, but their account is a metaphor?  How do we reconcile the two?

Brigham Young had no problem doing that.
He recognized that much of the account was fable, but that Father Adam and Mother Eve were not.

[Maidservant]

12 hours ago, SteveO said:

While I agree with the idea of the account of Genesis being a temple drama, I believe Joseph reported seeing both the personages of Adam and Eve in vision?  So they were actual people, but their account is a metaphor?  How do we reconcile the two?

I have stopped trying to reconcile anything.  I feel that's a good way to 'get it wrong' (speaking of myself only).  As if everything matching up and making sense = correctness.  There are many, many lovely theories without a seam in them that are totally wrong.  So beauty of conceptual structure does not mean 'got it right' (to me). Rather, I just hold things in suspension until I get greater light and knowledge.

At this point, despite some latter-day visions and meetings, I personally do not think Adam and Eve were actual persons in history.  But I don't squeak that too loud on that, and let's see, shall we?  So I hold the latter-day visions in suspension until I can understand better.

In the meantime, I am less concerned about Adam and Eve than about myself and the choices I am making, so I try to keep it in the present. That's not a conceptual project, it's a behavioral project (mine).

That's how I don't go insane, anyway, with all the bits in the 'gospel'.

Edited August 20, 2017 by Maidservant