Another Big Batch Of Temple Ordinance Changes

[Buckeye]

18 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Come back, things are quite different 

Thank you. I am back. I’ve attended the endowment since the changes four years ago. Ive never been without a recommend either. Even when not attending the endowment I went on youth baptism trips and did initiatories. 

[Bernard Gui]

On 2/10/2023 at 9:13 PM, Chum said:

An awesome thing about the true gospel is it doesn't demand women become less than they are.

My mom's generation grew up in a time where women were ceaselessly pressured to be subservient, obedient, etc to men. Mom and her sisters all bore scars (many physical) of that abominable mindset.

My mother, my wife, and her sisters grew up in that generation, and what you describe was absolutely not their experience. Temple covenants do not give men the right to abuse women. Any man now or from earlier times who treats women that way violated his covenants and broke all the laws of the temple.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

On 2/10/2023 at 11:09 PM, rockpond said:

Prior to the 1990 changes the wife only covenanted obedience to her husband. 

But only as he obeyed God. That is a significant motivator for a faithful man.

As Paul put it, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies.

“He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— for we are members of his body. ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’ This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.”

Edited February 13, 2023 by Bernard Gui

[Dario_M]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

My mother, my wife, and her sisters grew up in that generation, and what you describe was absolutely not their experience. Temple covenants did not give men the right to abuse women. Any man of earlier times who treated women that way violated his covenants and broke all the laws of the temple.

But that is YOUR experience. That doesn't mean that "your" experience happends all over the world. His experience whas cleary differend. And how is that posible you ask yourself? Well...maybe he lived in another state? Maybe in his ward things workt al little differend? Just some thoughts you know. 

[Teancum]

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

Emphasizing Christ more does not mean one rejects ideas of God once being a man or becoming Gods, ect. 

I did not say reject.

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

The truth is knowledge is useless if one does not not come to the savior and follow him. 

Ok. Was I arguing that coming to Christ was not essential?

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

There are some issues that have never been established as doctrines of the Church like what you said "Brigham Young's Adam God Doctrine." 

BY taught this and it was doctrinal enough to make it part of the St George temple endowment.

 

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

Not Joseph Smith's Adam God doctrine.  

So?

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

The views of one prophet does not automatically mean it becomes doctrine for everyone.

You are missing the point of my post. 

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

 Brigham Young himself admitted that he sometimes taught false things. 

That certainly creates a lot of confidence it so called prophets.  I think there is a Bible verse about this:

D

Quote

 

Deuteronomy 18:20

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”

 

 

 

On 2/11/2023 at 8:18 PM, carbon dioxide said:

 

If God wanted Brigham Young's views regarding the Adam God issue being canonized, he would do it. Until God pulls the trigger, no LDS member is required to accept it or prevents someone like me who has his own view of the issue.  It is true that doctrines and teachings do change from time to time as more knowledge and understanding occurs.   That is what progress is and that is a good thing.  If God gave us all the answers at the beginning, there is nothing left for us to do or work towards.  

THe point of my post was that what the church and its leaders have taught about the Godhead has changed over time.  BY's AG doctrine was certainly part of that. He taught it.  And many who heard it and read it believed it.

[Teancum]

On 2/11/2023 at 6:37 PM, JLHPROF said:

My grumbling is all a moot point anyway.  I don't believe we've given the actual endowment in decades, and even less so now.  We stopped giving patrons many things they used to be given.  It's like trying to ordain to priesthood or give the gift of the Holy Ghost without actually conferring or laying on hands.

I don't believe the current endowment is valid and fully expect all ordinances to be redone in the Millennium.  And luckily we'll have all the records to work from.

So honestly any of my grumbling about new changes really doesn't mean anything.  It's not like there are degrees of validity. 

This is an odd position for one that seems as believing as you. If you  think the LDS prophets have it so wrong how do you maintain faith in anything they say?

[Tacenda]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

This is an odd position for one that seems as believing as you. If you  think the LDS prophets have it so wrong how do you maintain faith in anything they say?

Any one of us could be prophets according to recent readings of it. So I think it's all a matter of personal revelation, and back to square one.

[Teancum]

On 2/12/2023 at 2:44 AM, mfbukowski said:

No, strawman.

To correct your analogy, other churches, it is believed,  never had it right anyway and changed what never was valid to begin with.

I do not think it is a strawman at all. The idea is there was a church.  The church had correct ordinances.  Then some changed, and then they changed and changed and changed. Thus the great apostasy.

Joseph Smith said:

 

Quote

“Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles.”  https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2001/08/ordinances-and-covenants?lang=eng

 

[Nofear]

16 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I do not think it is a strawman at all. The idea is there was a church.  The church had correct ordinances.  Then some changed, and then they changed and changed and changed. Thus the great apostasy.

Joseph Smith said:

“Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles.”  https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2001/08/ordinances-and-covenants?lang=eng

The response to that is that the endowment ordinance itself is unchanged and only the presentation and peculiarities in how it is delivered are/have varied. Joseph Smith told Brigham Young "Brother Brigham this is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed, and I wish you to take this matter in hand and organize and systematize all these ceremonies with the signs, tokens, penalties and key words."

[mfbukowski]

12 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I do not think it is a strawman at all. The idea is there was a church.  The church had correct ordinances.  Then some changed, and then they changed and changed and changed. Thus the great apostasy.

Joseph Smith said:

 

 

I never believed nor said Joseph was infallible.

Don't know anyone who believes that.

Ordinances are not magic words. Presentation changes, communication changes, it's cultural.

They are words, not magic.  It's what people understand about the words that is important. It's the mental and heart changes that count.

 

[Teancum]

24 minutes ago, Nofear said:

The response to that is that the endowment ordinance itself is unchanged and only the presentation and peculiarities in how it is delivered are/have varied. Joseph Smith told Brigham Young "Brother Brigham this is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed, and I wish you to take this matter in hand and organize and systematize all these ceremonies with the signs, tokens, penalties and key words."

@JLHPROFmight disagree with you.

[Teancum]

23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I never believed nor said Joseph was infallible.

NOw there is a straw man because I did not argue that.

23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Don't know anyone who believes that.

Ordinances are not magic words. Presentation changes, communication changes, it's cultural.

They are words, not magic.  It's what people understand about the words that is important. It's the mental and heart changes that count.

 

Hey I am fine with ya all watering down and diminishing so much that comes from the LDS prophets in order to make it work for you.  But it comes to the point that what they say is no better than what comes from any other person.

[mfbukowski]

On 2/11/2023 at 5:26 AM, Lemuel said:

Oh, yes, it was most likely wrong for women to covenant to obey their husbands, or if it was right, there was some symbolism in it that we lost or never knew.  The endowment has had all sorts of false doctrine in it, and probably still does.

How does one test this statement?

Why would clarifying Doctrine make it "false"?  What theory of truth are you basing your opinions on?

[JLHPROF]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

This is an odd position for one that seems as believing as you. If you  think the LDS prophets have it so wrong how do you maintain faith in anything they say?

That's an easy one.  It's because for me their office/calling has two sides to it.

As a Church we LOVE to focus on the title of "prophet" - makes us feel all fuzzy and special.
But these men have a second title that is equally important if not more important - that of Apostle.  And for me the sealing keys and priesthood authority are far more significant than any prophetic mantle.

Honestly - I often doubt their prophetic standing.  I'm not convinced there's much true revelation and they often get things wrong.

What that doesn't change is whether or not they hold the authority passed down from Peter, James, John, and Elijah as Apostles holding the sealing keys.  They are the only men on the earth authorized to seal on earth and in heaven, holding the authorityof the full priesthood.
Basically - they may not be much as Prophets but they are still Apostles.  I doubt very much they are actually prophets, seers, or revelators these days.  But their errors in doctrine doesn't remove their authority or priesthood office.
As long as they are speaking truth I will honor their authority.  When they get things wrong I can sustain their office but reject their error.
 

D&C 81:2 Unto whom I have given the keys of the kingdom, which belong always unto the Presidency of the High Priesthood:

D&C 132:46 And verily, verily, I say unto you, that whatsoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted eternally in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you retain on earth shall be retained in heaven.

D&C 107:22 Of the Melchizedek Priesthood, three Presiding High Priests, chosen by the body, appointed and ordained to that office, and upheld by the confidence, faith, and prayer of the church, form a quorum of the Presidency of the Church.
23 The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
24 And they form a quorum, equal in authority and power to the three presidents previously mentioned.
25 The Seventy are also called to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses unto the Gentiles and in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
26 And they form a quorum, equal in authority to that of the Twelve special witnesses or Apostles just named.
27 And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the aunanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other

D&C 84:19 And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God.
20 Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.
21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;
22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

 

[ttribe]

16 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That's an easy one.  It's because for me their office/calling has two sides to it.

As a Church we LOVE to focus on the title of "prophet" - makes us feel all fuzzy and special.
But these men have a second title that is equally important if not more important - that of Apostle.  And for me the sealing keys and priesthood authority are far more significant than any prophetic mantle.

Honestly - I often doubt their prophetic standing.  I'm not convinced there's much true revelation and they often get things wrong.

What that doesn't change is whether or not they hold the authority passed down from Peter, James, John, and Elijah as Apostles holding the sealing keys.  They are the only men on the earth authorized to seal on earth and in heaven, holding the authorityof the full priesthood.
Basically - they may not be much as Prophets but they are still Apostles.  I doubt very much they are actually prophets, seers, or revelators these days.  But their errors in doctrine doesn't remove their authority or priesthood office.
As long as they are speaking truth I will honor their authority.  When they get things wrong I can sustain their office but reject their error.
 

D&C 81:2 Unto whom I have given the keys of the kingdom, which belong always unto the Presidency of the High Priesthood:

D&C 132:46 And verily, verily, I say unto you, that whatsoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted eternally in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you retain on earth shall be retained in heaven.

D&C 107:22 Of the Melchizedek Priesthood, three Presiding High Priests, chosen by the body, appointed and ordained to that office, and upheld by the confidence, faith, and prayer of the church, form a quorum of the Presidency of the Church.
23 The twelve traveling councilors are called to be the Twelve Apostles, or special witnesses of the name of Christ in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
24 And they form a quorum, equal in authority and power to the three presidents previously mentioned.
25 The Seventy are also called to preach the gospel, and to be especial witnesses unto the Gentiles and in all the world—thus differing from other officers in the church in the duties of their calling.
26 And they form a quorum, equal in authority to that of the Twelve special witnesses or Apostles just named.
27 And every decision made by either of these quorums must be by the aunanimous voice of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other

D&C 84:19 And this greater priesthood administereth the gospel and holdeth the key of the mysteries of the kingdom, even the key of the knowledge of God.
20 Therefore, in the ordinances thereof, the power of godliness is manifest.
21 And without the ordinances thereof, and the authority of the priesthood, the power of godliness is not manifest unto men in the flesh;
22 For without this no man can see the face of God, even the Father, and live.

 

Uhhh, how do you answer the temple recommend question using these exact words?

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, Dario_M said:

But that is YOUR experience. That doesn't mean that "your" experience happends all over the world. His experience whas cleary differend. And how is that posible you ask yourself? Well...maybe he lived in another state? Maybe in his ward things workt al little differend? Just some thoughts you know. 

Thank you Dario. What I said about the covenants is true everywhere in the world.  I have lived in a number of states and countries. I know what I am talking about. What I said about those women that I know is also true. I’m sure there are many with both kinds of experiences.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

On 2/11/2023 at 12:49 PM, Nofear said:

The "heavenly abode" of God is never depicted as it was in previous versions. The endowment is fine fading to black with just voices

Thank goodness!

With so many different perceptions of God, and with his ineffable nature, I think it is best to leave it up to the individual's imagination.

It always felt so Clash of the Titans to me with their marble cathedral in the sky.  I always remembered thinking, "if that is what heaven is really like, I don't want to go there".

Edited February 13, 2023 by pogi

[Dario_M]

28 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Thank you Dario. What I said about the covenants is true everywhere in the world.  I have lived in a number of states and countries. I know what I am talking about. What I said about those women that I know is also true. I’m sure there are many with both kinds of experiences.

Yeah true true. Indeed i haven't been in any state indeed. So i don't know that much that's true. You are right about that. Thanks for correcting me on that. So thoughtfull of you dear Bernard Gui.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Dario_M

[Kenngo1969]

3 hours ago, Nofear said:

The response to that is that the endowment ordinance itself is unchanged and only the presentation and peculiarities in how it is delivered are/have varied. Joseph Smith told Brigham Young "Brother Brigham this is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed, and I wish you to take this matter in hand and organize and systematize all these ceremonies with the signs, tokens, penalties and key words."

I'm not doubting that exchange took place, but do you have a reference for it?

[manol]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Honestly - I often doubt their prophetic standing.  I'm not convinced there's much true revelation and they often get things wrong...

I doubt very much they are actually prophets, seers, or revelators these days. 

I agree with this, and therefore would be unable to get past that temple recommend interview question.

I do think they are good and sincere and very often inspired men, and the "open canon" is imo valid cause for hope.

Do you think that currently God "does now reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God"?  I do, but I don't think these sorts of things are coming through any religion at this moment in time.  

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

... For me the sealing keys and priesthood authority are far more significant than any prophetic mantle...

What doesn't change is whether or not they hold the authority passed down from Peter, James, John, and Elijah as Apostles holding the sealing keys.  They are the only men on the earth authorized to seal on earth and in heaven, holding the authority of the full priesthood.

Basically - they may not be much as Prophets but they are still Apostles... their errors in doctrine doesn't remove their authority or priesthood office.

As long as they are speaking truth I will honor their authority.  When they get things wrong I can sustain their office but reject their error.

At the risk of oversimplifying:  I think your position is that the authority matters above everything else, and any doctrinal errors are secondary. 

Does there come a point where errors in doctrine rise to the level of nullifying authority?  If so, how would that be recognized? 

Edited February 13, 2023 by manol

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Basically - they may not be much as Prophets but they are still Apostles.  I doubt very much they are actually prophets, seers, or revelators these days.  But their errors in doctrine doesn't remove their authority or priesthood office.
As long as they are speaking truth I will honor their authority.  When they get things wrong I can sustain their office but reject their error.

It seems that teaching false doctrine and/or false ordinances could or should negate their authority should it not?

[Nofear]

47 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I'm not doubting that exchange took place, but do you have a reference for it?

This I think is the reference I used. When I first used the quote, I just did a search based on vague memory and picked one reference. https://bycommonconsent.com/2018/05/17/the-unfinished-endowment/

Most of the quote is cited elsewhere (e.g. churchnews) but omit the tokens and signs part.

Edited February 13, 2023 by Nofear

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

This I think is the reference I used. When I first used the quote, I just did a search based on vague memory and picked one reference. https://bycommonconsent.com/2018/05/17/the-unfinished-endowment/

Most of the quote is cited elsewhere (e.g. churchnews) but omit the tokens and signs part.

Thanks.  I appreciate your efforts.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

It seems that teaching false doctrine and/or false ordinances could or should negate their authority should it not?

Well, I'm a believer in the revelations to Joseph.  And he specifically revealed that:

D&C 27:12 And also with Peter, and James, and John, whom I have sent unto you, by whom I have ordained you and confirmed you to be apostles, and especial witnesses of my name, and bear the keys of your ministry and of the same things which I revealed unto them;
13 Unto whom I have committed the keys of my kingdom, and a dispensation of the gospel for the last times; and for the fulness of times, in the which I will gather together in gone all things, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth;

D&C 90:2 Therefore, thou art blessed from henceforth that bear the keys of the kingdom given unto you; which kingdom is coming forth for the last time.

D&C 33:3 For behold, the field is white already to harvest; and it is the eleventh hour, and the last time that I shall call laborers into my vineyard.

So yeah, I'm not prepared to give up on the restored authority yet.  I believe the priesthood is both necessary and was restored for the last time so it's on earth somewhere.
As far as I can determine only the leaders of the Church have any valid claim whatsoever.  If making mistakes in doctrines and ordinances were sufficient to cause another worldwide apostasy we'd all be damned because God said this is the final restoration.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

Most of the quote is cited elsewhere (e.g. churchnews) but omit the tokens and signs part.

That seems to be the direction headed.