Under the Banner of Heaven Trailer

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It was wrong or why else is it no longer happening? 

Why do we not teach Middle English in our schools?  Is it because it was wrong or because we no longer understand its meaning as we should, it would be more confusing than helpful to learn?

[ttribe]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

YOUR inconsistent interpretation, a sure sign of logical contradiction, probably purposeful to make it ridiculously controversial 

You switch from third person plural, "slitting of throats" to someone committing hari kari, first person singular.

So is this murder or suicide????? Who is supposedly doing this?

Inconsistent and blatantly false and absurd, not to mention disgusting.

Yes, THANK GOD, interpretations vary 

You are rationalizing and I won't follow you down that path.

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why do we not teach Middle English in our schools?  Is it because it was wrong or because we no longer understand its meaning as we should, it would be more confusing than helpful to learn?

Especially after enemies with an agenda have intentionally sought to sow confusion.

[mfbukowski]

7 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It was wrong or why else is it no longer happening? 

Because people do not think things through, and apparently protested

That makes it "unpopular" not "wrong".

They are not seeing it as intended. It was not written that way to be blatantly "wrong".

God supposedly ACTUALLY wiped out the Canaanites.

Historically did THAT happen?  Did he nuke them? 

These are stories and parables to teach us spiritual matters.  Did God kill those murderer victims in Utah?

No, they were deviant and evil human beings.  If we want to make it supernatural and imo superstitious, blame it on Satanic possession, not on God.  

Humans do these things to themselves.  Look at the Ukraine!

[mfbukowski]

16 minutes ago, ttribe said:

You are rationalizing and I won't follow you down that path.

Yes, I AM making it rational. Not following that path is routine

 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Because people do not think things through, and apparently protested

That makes it "unpopular" not "wrong".

They are not seeing it as intended. It was not written that way to be blatantly "wrong".

God supposedly ACTUALLY wiped out the Canaanites.

Historically did THAT happen?  Did he nuke them? 

These are stories and parables to teach us spiritual matters.  Did God kill those murderer victims in Utah?

No, they were deviant and evil human beings.  If we want to make it supernatural and imo superstitious, blame it on Satanic possession, not on God.  

Humans do these things to themselves.  Look at the Ukraine!

IMO, it came from Masonry not God. Leaders make mistakes right? And Joseph was learning right? And he thought using some rituals would help create a ladder to heaven, the highest rung. There is a quote by him but don't have it right now.

https://greensboro.com/masonic-ritual-freemasons-ancient-group-seeks-new-blood-known-for-their-secrets-the-freemasons-are/article_d5c3a113-8cd2-5971-8ec1-11a5d6d0d464.html

 

https://saintsunscripted.com/faith-and-beliefs/laws-and-ordinances/joseph-smith-steal-temple-endowment-freemasonry/

[Hamba Tuhan]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, it came from Masonry not God.

No doubt Moses got it from Freemasonry as well!

[mfbukowski]

53 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

No doubt Moses got it from Freemasonry as well!

EXACTLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

IMO, it came from Masonry not God. Leaders make mistakes right? And Joseph was learning right? And he thought using some rituals would help create a ladder to heaven, the highest rung. There is a quote by him but don't have it right now.

https://greensboro.com/masonic-ritual-freemasons-ancient-group-seeks-new-blood-known-for-their-secrets-the-freemasons-are/article_d5c3a113-8cd2-5971-8ec1-11a5d6d0d464.html

 

https://saintsunscripted.com/faith-and-beliefs/laws-and-ordinances/joseph-smith-steal-temple-endowment-freemasonry/

1. Read Exodus and you will see the the temple anointings and endowment IF you understand the symbols 

2. YOUR article says this:

" Before a would-be member can be initiated, he memorizes lengthy descriptions of the punishments for divulging the group's secrets. The punishments include tearing out the tongue, slitting the throat and having ``your breast torn open and left prey to the vultures of the air.'

Masons say the descriptions are allegorical - as is most Masonic literature - and shouldn't be taken literally.  "

 

3 -Which is exactly what I said above

 

4 -All the early leaders were Masons, and all approved.

The argument just makes no sense

 

Did you read the second article you linked?  It backs up and agrees  with all we temple supporters  have said, and answers your own questions 

Edited May 2, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

EXACTLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Moses says to mimic our deaths?

[Hamba Tuhan]

19 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Moses says to mimic our deaths?

Do you ever read any of the links/quotes we provide???

Quote

In Hebrew, one does not “make” a covenant. Rather, one “cuts” a covenant (Heb. karat berit), perhaps because, frequently, an animal is “cut” and killed in the covenant-making process. (Joseph Smith seems to have been particularly aware of this, as JST Hebrew 9:17-18 demonstrates. This passage is not included among the JST excerpts in the LDS KJV, but it can be read here.)¹ Normally, the person who brought the animal cut its throat with his right hand and collected the the blood with his left. This blood was the “blood of the covenant,” as in Exo 24:8. When instituting the sacrament, Jesus adapted the covenantal/sacrificial symbolism of the Law of Moses by calling the sacramental wine “my blood of the new covenant.” ( Matt. 26:28.)

In effect, the sacrificed animal stood as a proxy, as a physical representation of  the covenant-maker if they failed to live up to the terms of the covenant. (Well, maybe. See below). Scholars refer to physical symbolism as a “simile curse.” In Exodus 24, the “blood of the covenant” is splashed on the Israelites, as the blood would be if their throats had been cut as the animal’s throat had been cut. This is widely recognized. The sprinkling of blood on the people was a

symbolic action in which the people were identified with the sacrificed animal, so that the fate of the latter is presented as the fate to be expected by the people if they violated their sacred promise (i.e., it is a form of self-curse). Thus the ratification ceremony was, in effect, the pledging of their lives as a guarantee of obedience to the divine will.”

-Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1:1185 “Covenant.”

For a concurring analysis,

The sprinkling of blood is a ritualized oath-curse—in technical terminology, a Drohitus. The sprinkled blood of the slain animals represents the curse of death that both parties invoke upon themselves should they prove unfaithful to their covenantal obligations. The mutual sprinkling of blood may also convey the idea that both parties now share one blood—that is, they have become kin.

– Hahn, Kinship by Covenant, 47.

 

Quote

 6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

And it could be spiritual death- that's the real threat which is far worse.

This is specifically what we discussed in our Sunday school class yesterday in relation to Exodus 31:15: 'Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death'.

Quoting Ben Spackman again:

Given that the text recounts the Israelites almost immediately engaging in idolatry and other serious problems, why don’t we have tons of stories of Israelites being killed for violating the Law, as implied by the simile curses? As far as I know, we don’t have any ...

Simile curses were intended to depict the seriousness of the covenant, not a literal, legal thing to be carried out by human society ...

And in fact, from the beginning, provision was made for people to escape this symbolic threat of death:

The agreed-upon covenantal penalty for violating the terms of the covenant, was still carried out, but by proxy, on a male animal without blemish. Having made and ratified the covenant by sacrifice (Psa. 50:5), each sacrifice offered after that represented atonement for the person (Lev. 1:4), as well as a reminder and renewal of the original covenant ...

Though it should be obvious how this relates to Jesus and the Atonement, let me point out a few scriptures. Remember that “the reward of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). Paul taught that Jesus “redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us — for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.’” (Gal. 3:13). The Law of Moses specified in Deuteronomy 21:22-23 that someone who committed a crime worthy of death was cursed and their body would be publicly displayed on a tree or stake. Paul draws on that passage to show that Jesus, like the burnt offering, bears the curse of the covenant for us, goes in our place, and dies in our behalf. “Surely, he hath borne our sins, and carried our sorrows.” (Isa 53:4). 

The symbolic escape (blood sacrifice) from symbolic death (simile curses) was designed to teach people to have faith in a literal escape (by means of Jesus's shed blood) from the literal spiritual death that results from inevitably violating our covenants.

Significantly, in the modern temple drama, the only character who tries to scares us into fearing what will happen when/if we break our covenants is Satan, i.e., the father of all lies. In stark contrast, the Father appears, with Jesus at his right hand, and offers the Son as our redeemer.

I feel strongly that people can't be as ignorant of the role of rituals and symbols as they appear in this thread, or of the common language of sin and redemption; consequently, it seems to me that critics are willing to feign ignorance because it facilitates their insatiable desire to express outrage. The concept that the 'wages of sin is death' is essential to the doctrine of Christ. 'Disgust' with simile curses therefore is really just a rejection of the concept of sin and Atonement.

 

Edited May 2, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[teddyaware]

37 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Moses says to mimic our deaths?

I find it interesting that some members find the symbolic sacrificial deaths associated with the temple rites to be deeply troubling while not being at all disturbed about the graphic symbolic sacrificial death experienced when they were baptized by immersion in the likeness of the death of Christ. More powerful evidence that without the enlightening revelatory influence of the Spirit it’s impossible to comprehend the things of God.

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is CRUCIFIED WITH HIM, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: (Romans 6)

Now that you have the inside scoop about baptism, concerning how it’s symbolic of being crucified with Christ, do you now find the symbolic sacrificial death that occurs at baptism to also be disturbing and unacceptable?

Edited May 2, 2022 by teddyaware

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I find it interesting that some members find the symbolic sacrificial deaths associated with the temple rites to be deeply troubling while not being at all disturbed about the graphic symbolic sacrificial death experienced when they were baptized by immersion in the likeness of the death of Christ. More powerful evidence that without the enlightening revelatory influence of the Spirit it’s impossible to comprehend the things of God.

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is CRUCIFIED WITH HIM, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: (Romans 6)

Now that you have the inside scoop about baptism, concerning how it’s symbolic of being crucified with Christ, do you now find the symbolic sacrificial death that occurs at baptism to also be disturbing and unacceptable?

But I wasn't mimicking my death for Him. I was for the church and to not say what happened in the temple. Much like the masons and their lodges. That's where I think it's wrong. I had always thought it came from God until I found out different. But I don't care to get into it. Can I have an opinion? 

Edited May 2, 2022 by Tacenda

[Tacenda]

5 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Do you ever read any of the links/quotes we provide???

 

 

Well, are those reading these scriptures you quote misunderstanding them. I like this person's research. https://www.orthodoxwitness.org/psalm-129-christ-will-cut-their-necks-an-interpretation/

Although the Fathers in their writings as well as the hymnographer who composed the Antiphons had before them a translation that had misunderstood one Hebrew word, which means cords or ropes, and not necks,

[Nofear]

One of the biggest problems with the Krakauer hypothesis that religiosity = violence is that the data simply does not support it. So far the argument goes like this:

Person A: you religious people have violence baked into your theology -- it's a huge problem
Person B: there are some violent things that are either 1) symbolic or 2) bad people doing things in the name of religion
Person A: not symbolic and it's the religion making people bad - mic drop

Yet, in the end, the amount of violence (and crime in general) currently (and historically by the Church) is way below the rates of violence perpetuated by the non-religious. Nor are there any accounts of the supposedly non-symbolic violence being enacted*. Let the nay-sayers make all the claims they want, but if they can't back up their claims by factual reality, they espouse a fantasy far worse than what they accuse we believers of. In some cases it rises to the level of bearing false witness (or worse).

 

PS: Though, I haven't seen it is the show, I somehow doubt that that it'll mention that the two murders were excommunicated from the Church a year or two before the murders. Heck, they were even separated from the splinter group that they joined (Crossfield's School of the Prophets) after their excommunication from the Church. The Lafferty brothers were too radical for even them.

* Heck, even in the Lafferty case, the slitting of the throat very much seems to have been an after thought when it appeared she wasn't 100% strangled to death.

[Tacenda]

6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

1. Read Exodus and you will see the the temple anointings and endowment IF you understand the symbols 

2. YOUR article says this:

" Before a would-be member can be initiated, he memorizes lengthy descriptions of the punishments for divulging the group's secrets. The punishments include tearing out the tongue, slitting the throat and having ``your breast torn open and left prey to the vultures of the air.'

Masons say the descriptions are allegorical - as is most Masonic literature - and shouldn't be taken literally.  "

 

3 -Which is exactly what I said above

 

4 -All the early leaders were Masons, and all approved.

The argument just makes no sense

 

Did you read the second article you linked?  It backs up and agrees  with all we temple supporters  have said, and answers your own questions 

To the bold, I linked the second because I wanted a back up that it was accepted that Joseph used Masonry in the temple. 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

To the bold, I linked the second because I wanted a back up that it was accepted that Joseph used Masonry in the temple. 

The similarities are indisputable and no big deal.  ALL the early leaders were masons.  So what?

THEY ALL KNEW THE SIMILARITIES AND IT WAS NOT A PROBLEM FOR THEM.  Why should it be 200 years later?  We do not understand their world view

It is a symbolic language everyone "spoke" at the time, like writing in English instead of Swahili!!

Why would he use symbols Nobody ever saw before??  They were the "currency" of their time ! 

Edited May 2, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Moses says to mimic our deaths?

I'm sorry, I don't understand the question 

[Tacenda]

10 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

The similarities are indisputable and no big deal.  ALL the early leaders were masons.  So what?

THEY ALL KNEW THE SIMILARITIES AND IT WAS NOT A PROBLEM FOR THEM.  Why should it be 200 years later?  We do not understand their world view

It is a symbolic language everyone "spoke" at the time, like writing in English instead of Swahili!!

Why would he use symbols Nobody ever saw before??  They were the "currency" of their time ! 

It would have been nice to have known the backstory. Just as so much in TCOJCOLDS's history. Do you know if this was told to members anywhere? Evidence that they were informed before taking such oaths? It would have been nice to know this.

[california boy]

13 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

YOUR inconsistent interpretation, a sure sign of logical contradiction, probably purposeful to make it ridiculously controversial 

You switch from third person plural, "slitting of throats" to someone committing hari kari, first person singular.

So is this murder or suicide????? Who is supposedly doing this?

Inconsistent and blatantly false and absurd, not to mention disgusting.

Yes, THANK GOD, interpretations vary 

It looks like people have a different view about this part of the temple ceremony.  You obviously have no problem with it, others do.  So why not let the public decide for themselves.  The slitting of the throat part of the temple ceremony is factual, but probably not some holy sacred part of the ceremony.  Or do some think that part of the ceremony is still actually holy and sacred?  

If it is still considered holy and sacred, why are members of the Church talking about it openly on a public forum.  Is it any different talking about it on a public forum than including it as part of a period piece movie?

[mfbukowski]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

It would have been nice to have known the backstory. Just as so much in TCOJCOLDS's history. Do you know if this was told to members anywhere? Evidence that they were informed before taking such oaths? It would have been nice to know this.

The wording was these were to indicate "ways in which lives may be taken"

I personally never even associated this to be a threat to anyone, after hearing the words monthly for 10 years.  Due to the symbology of the gestures, which has not and cannot be mentioned I personally saw the first as equivalent to "false witness will kill your spirit".  I saw the second as saying "a false heart is spiritual death", and the third as "without spiritual nutrition, your spirit dies"

THE GESTURES THEMSELVES HAVE MEANING TO ME, the main one was the sign (to me) of eternal truth and justice judging my spirit, IF I HAD BROKEN THE COVENANT, to be worthy of spiritual death.

 

After 10 years of prayer, study of symbology and temple attendance I came up with an equivalent for each "penalty", all with slightly different meanings. 

Then some yahoo comes along and says "no, it's about cutting your throat if you tell"

Primitive, ignorant, gross and disgusting interpretation of a solemn insight and truth of heaven. 

So what happened?

They had to remove it for those who saw it ignorantly.

Yuck.  I have to go get a shower after that.

But YOU never had the opportunity to see it that way, because those ignorant people took away your ability to have the whole experience and see it for yourself

Sorry that you didn't!

And that trend continues to dumb things down as mankind moves in that direction 

It's not the church that's wrong, it's humanity that the church is tasked to teach sublime truth.

[Analytics]

38 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

The similarities are indisputable and no big deal.  ALL the early leaders were masons.  So what?

Everyone is free to interpret the ordinances however they want to, of course. Personally, I was taught "Universal apostasy followed the death of the Savior and His Apostles. Over the centuries that followed, man was no longer authorized to act for God. This condition helped to fulfill prophecy: “The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant” (Isaiah 24:5)." (see https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-13-the-restoration-of-the-aaronic-priesthood?lang=eng)

Changing ordinances defiles the earth and is a telltale sign of apostasy.

Yes, the Church now teaches "Through inspiration, the methods of instruction in the temple experience have changed many times, even in recent history, to help members better understand and live what they learn in the temple." (see https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-temple-message-july-2020) But to me, that comes across as gaslighting.

I was taught that it's vitally important that the ordinances be done in exactly the right way. That is why two witnesses carefully watch a baptism to make sure the immersion is complete and if it isn't, it must be done again. Otherwise it would be changing the ordinance.

I was also  taught that it was vitally important that the specific words of ordinances come via revelation and must not be changed. That is why the bishop carefully listens to the sacrament prayer, and if the priest makes even the tinniest error in how it is read, he must repeat the whole thing. That's how important it is not to change ordinances. 

[mfbukowski]

37 minutes ago, california boy said:

It looks like people have a different view about this part of the temple ceremony.  You obviously have no problem with it, others do.  So why not let the public decide for themselves.  The slitting of the throat part of the temple ceremony is factual, but probably not some holy sacred part of the ceremony.  Or do some think that part of the ceremony is still actually holy and sacred?  

If it is still considered holy and sacred, why are members of the Church talking about it openly on a public forum.  Is it any different talking about it on a public forum than including it as part of a period piece movie?

What was the spiritual implement of stopping THIS VERY DISCUSSION?

A hand gesture indicating eternal truth and justice and in the garment and used again and again so maybe we "get" it , but we don't.

And what does that sword of truth do?  It spiritually silences false witness about spiritual things, through spiritual death.

Right here, right now.

No thanks  I'm out.    

 

[mfbukowski]

19 minutes ago, Analytics said:

 

I was taught that it's vitally important that the ordinances be done in exactly the right way. That is why two witnesses carefully watch a baptism to make sure the immersion is complete and if it isn't, it must be done again. Otherwise it would be changing the ordinance.

I'm sorry you were taught Harry Potter magic instead of the Gospel.

The atonement is a wonderful thing that protects us even from our own errors

Edited May 2, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Tacenda]

12 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

What was the spiritual implement of stopping THIS VERY DISCUSSION?

A hand gesture indicating eternal truth and justice and in the garment and used again and again so maybe we "get" it , but we don't.

And what does that sword of truth do?  It spiritually silences false witness about spiritual things, through spiritual death.

Right here, right now.

No thanks  I'm out.    

 

Thanks for answering me and being forthright with your understandings on your posts to me, not this one since it's directed to california boy. You could have just ignored me. Hopefully you're not going too far and can still discuss where you need or want to on this thread. I wish I'd been more spiritually touched when going to the temple. It was more a feeling of needing to leave but knowing I was suppose to be there. And I had a dear friend who was the RS president and I was her secretary and she would testify about going to the temple and how it helped her so much and me sitting there listening to her testimony each F&T meeting in Relief Society on Sundays and wondering why I hadn't gotten those same feelings. 

Edited May 2, 2022 by Tacenda