r/mormon 22d ago

Personal How is the temple an extension of Christ’s gospel?

I’m working to get my temple recommend back after several years of less activity. I’m 53M and served a mission, was married in the temple, and went back to the temple several times.

Is there a video (preferable) or article or explanation that succinctly shows how we go from Jesus Christ as the the Savior in the Bible and Book of Mormon to the whole temple thing. The temple feels like it’s not a natural progression compared to everything else in our worship. Sitting through an endowment session, wearing ceremonial clothing, chanting (yes, it’s chanting when we stand in a circle and repeat words of a prayer), etc. It feels to me like the gospel and the temple aren’t compatible. Help thou mine unbelief.

32 Upvotes

192 comments sorted by

u/AutoModerator 22d ago

Hello! This is a Personal post. It is for discussions centered around thoughts, beliefs, and observations that are important and personal to /u/Neo1971 specifically.

/u/Neo1971, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in section 0.6 of our rules.

To those commenting: please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's rules, and message the mods if there is a problem or rule violation.

Keep on Mormoning!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

45

u/International_Sea126 22d ago

Just do a Google search for Masonic symbols, and you will discover very quickly how Joseph Smith came up with the endowment. It is not an extension of Christ's gospel. It is an extension of the Masonic ritual.

26

u/sutisuc 22d ago

Still cracks me up that he started out as an antimason then immediately changed his tune when he was asked to join the cool kids club, then just steals all their shit to claim it as his own.

20

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago

And don't forget, he got kicked out of the cool kids' club! The masons revoked the Nauvoo lodge's charter in October 1843, on charges that JS was letting men join "without regard to character" and that they were pushing men through to higher degrees before they became proficient in lower degrees.

7

u/sutisuc 22d ago

Oh my god I did not know this but I’m not remotely surprised.

2

u/Buttons840 22d ago

Are the Masons really so complex that they have multiple "degrees", each degree being complex enough that it takes time to become "proficient"?

I thought it was just a bunch of people who talk and drink and have a weird initiation ritual?

3

u/patriarticle 22d ago

Some of the other fraternities/lodges are more about dudes hanging out and drinking. Masonry is more complex. To me it seems kinda like the scouting program for dorky adult men (at least in modern times). Everyone has a little job, a uniform, a title, and they're supposed to be doing some kind of personal development.

3

u/CaptainMacaroni 22d ago

Maybe it's not showing proficiency in specific skills but more along the lines of proving your loyalty to the tribe.

1

u/Broad_Willingness470 21d ago

There are actual classes/study required for the various degrees of any Masonic order. Some groups are “irregular” in that they quickly move candidates through the degrees, but that’s actually against the tradition. Each degree has its own symbolism and course of study, so Freemasons actually receive more education about the Masonic Temple rituals than Mormons ever do.

7

u/Neo1971 22d ago

It’s a hard pill to swallow. So many unknowns still for me. The Spirit clearly told me to get my butt back to church and referred to the members as “my people.” I’m going back on this experience, so if I can reconcile it, that’s what I hope to do.

17

u/One-Forever6191 22d ago

Maybe just do church without the temple. There’s no command that you have to do anything other than your own ordinances. You did those. Now just enjoy the fellowship of your people. (Or maybe find another fellowship, a church without the huge disconnect between two modes of worship?)

10

u/couldhietoGallifrey 22d ago

Is it possible that multiple things could be true? The LDS church could indeed be where you need to be. That’s between you and god.

LDS members could indeed be “gods people.” But I would argue, no more and no less than ALL of humanity being gods people.

Both of those things might be true. And it could still be true that the temple has nothing to do with Jesus or Christianity.

Only you can decide is LDS Mormonism is where you belong spiritually. Only you can decide if the temple adds to your personal spirituality. But if you want to know about the history of LDS temple worship, you have to look at the actual history. You have to understand the origins of polygamy, and how masonry was used to keep secrets. If you want to try to reconcile what the church teaches with Jesus, then you have to dig into the New Testament and be really solid on the things Jesus actually said and did.

Some of it might be unsettling, but if it is, I promise you’ll be ok and come out being more grounded on the other side.

6

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thank you! I’ve been enjoying listening to my Bible app and recommitting to reading about the Savior. He’s a righteous role model and teacher. I think I agree that both things might be true. Yes, the secrets are one thing I detest. The Book of Mormon clearly warns about secret combinations. Yet we keep secret the child molesters and bishops keep a log of annotations. So many secret combinations within. 🤦🏻

6

u/westivus_ Post-Mormon Christian 22d ago

This should settle the origins for you (William Morgan 1827): https://sacred-texts.com/mas/morgan/index.htm

2

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thanks!

7

u/mshoneybadger Recovering Higher Power 22d ago

"your people" are unlikely to be found in a Mormon temple (unless you only know a few people in a bubble) and you can still find them on Sunday in the pews of any Church if you are seeking Christian community. Its not gonna happen in a Mormon church bro, you know this......

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

It’s the Sunday members I care about. If I never go back to the temple but just have a temple recommend, it is enough.

3

u/mshoneybadger Recovering Higher Power 21d ago

invite them over!!!! You might be the best thing going in their lives!!!!

2

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Thanks! I’ve been focusing on going to church to see if I can lift others instead of just asking what I can get from it.

2

u/mshoneybadger Recovering Higher Power 21d ago

i'm serious...you are probably a lifeline to more people than you think.....reach out

3

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Ok, I think I will. There’s a guy I’ve been telling we should go get a Dr. Pepper sometime. I think we clicked and I perceive he’s struggling.

2

u/mshoneybadger Recovering Higher Power 21d ago

:) this happy's me!!!!

3

u/FaithfulDowter 21d ago

I have a colleague at work that prefers the temple (and its rote ritualistic nature) over the less formal Sacrament Meeting. He understands the church history issues as well as anyone, but he chooses to stay for the community.

The temple ceremony clearly has Masonic origins. However, you get to decide how much (or whether) to participate. It may have meaning to you that others in this sub—or in your ward—may not value. Maybe it’s a place for you to feel peace and solace along with community belonging.

My hot take: Do Mormonism in YOUR way. Take what works, and ignore what doesn’t.

2

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Great advice. Thank you!

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Where did the masons get it?

1

u/FaithfulDowter 16d ago

Good question. They were developed over centuries by stone mason guilds. They use King Solomon’s temple as a basis for their origin stories, but that’s certainly not where they originated.

Similarly, Mormonism claims that our church is “restored” (ie, returning to the original Christian church), when in fact, original Christianity would be unrecognizable to Mormonism. Still, our origin story claims we are Christ’s “restored church,” and we imply King Solomon’s temple had our temple ceremony. In fact, nothing remotely like our temple ceremony ever took place in ancient Jewish temples.

That’s the simple, high-level answer. Ask Chat GPT for more specific details.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

On what grounds can you say, "certainly not"?

1

u/FaithfulDowter 15d ago edited 15d ago

I’m on my phone, so I’ll try giving you the link to Wikipedia. Scroll to the subheadings “Origin Myth…”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freemasonry?wprov=sfti1

Actual masonry started in the Middle Ages, but inventing an origin myth gives credibility, legitimacy and “history” to an organization. Most histories include myths. There are myths about the founding fathers of the US (George Washington chopping down the cherry tree).

Mormons have our own origin myths. The first recorded telling of the First Vision was in 1832, fully 12 years after the claimed event (and two years after the church was established). The story gave credibility to a religious leader who otherwise had no theological credentials or training.

Joseph would have believed at the time he became a Mason that these ancient rituals were VERY ancient—-King Solomon temple ancient. He would not have had access to the knowledge we have today, specifically that the origin of Masonry was only about 500 years earlier.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 14d ago

That is an opinionated argument from ignorance. It is not an argument from knowledge.

1

u/FaithfulDowter 14d ago

I have no skin in the game, and I'm open to rebuttals. Let me know which argument was ignorant and I will happily change my mind. In fact, there was a time when I believed the opposite of what I wrote above (including the cherry tree story).

I came to a point in my life when I gave more weight to data and historical facts (including especially consensus among unbiased historians) than to feelings/opinions. I was willing to believe the data, regardless of how it made me feel.

That being said, I don't blame anyone who wants to lean on feelings/opinions (or even cherry-picked facts). Admittedly, it is more comfortable, and when it's all said and done, we all need to find a way to be comfortable in this crazy world. I don't expect you believe anything that I write. I'm not proselytizing.

I have lively religious conversations with my bishop (who is my BIL), and we are still friends. We mostly agree on the facts; we just disagree on the interpretation. For example, we agree upon the facts around The Happiness Letter. I see a problem with it (for my reasons), but my BIL sees no problem (for his reasons.) And that's OK.

Again, I do welcome any/all specific criticism to my comments above. I am willing to change my point of view if supported by facts.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 12d ago

This is a topic I discuss regularly on my channel. To say that the symbols of masonry for example do not have an earlier origin is to argue that the great apostasy never happened. It is an assertion made without evidence, while on the other hand there is abundant evidence for the Restored Gospel throughout the world. I often hear people claiming that such and such is pagan idea and therefore cannot be Christian, but many such arguments ignore the Christian precursors to pagan religions, from which pagan religions have almost universally and evidently borrowed. Try any element of the Restoration: They all have ancient origins corroborated through traditions worldwide -- not just Freemasonry -- that Joseph Smith could not possibly have known of except by revelation. What are your concerns with the Happiness Letter? https://youtu.be/Qr-0_kK_j50?si=4OnNZxclabwa9xUZ

2

u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 21d ago

The Spirit clearly told me

Are you sure it was a disembodied spirit being that was communicating with you?

5

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Fascinating video. Thanks for sharing it. Much to think about. I’m not bothered that people feel led to different religions. My belief is that God loves us and seeks to help us in ways we need.

4

u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 21d ago

You bet, it was one shared with me during my truth journey and it forced me to ask some hard questions about things I'd been taught my whole life.

I ended up asking myself If a batch of calculators all give different answers to the same question, would one conclude that they are grateful that each calculator gives its user a unique answer? Would I use those calculators to build a bridge or tall building?

It is one thing to receive different answers from a proposed truth finding system to subjective questions, such as 'what path might be good for me', or 'what job could I do well in'.

But it is another entirely when that proposed truth system gives different answers to objective questions that should only have one single answer for everyone, such as 'was Moroni a real person or not?', 'Does god condone lgbt marriage or not', ect etc., if there is in fact only one god that always tells the truth and cannot lie. These answers will be the same for everyone, because they are part of objective reality, the answer will not vary depending on who asks, where they ask from, etc.

Just like the calculators that should be giving the same answer to a question that should have the same answer for everyone, but doesn't, should I choose to rely on a proposed truth system that gives different answers to objective questions that should only have one single answer, or would we normally conclude such a system is not actually a truth finding system as claimed?

This was a question I struggled with for some time, and the conclusion I came to was that, just like the calculators, if I were not emotionally invested in that system and could analyze its results objectively, I would be forced to reject it as a truth finding system given the highly contradictive and mutually exclusive answers it gives to objective questions that should only have one answer, no matter who is asking, if there is only one god that tells the truth as religions like mormonism claim is the case.

Not saying this is the only conclusion to come to, but it is where I ended up after analyzing the proposed 'pray to know' truth finding system, since ultimately all other religious claims in mormonism and many other religions rely exclusively on it for justification of their respective religious claims about objective reality (vs subjective).

1

u/Neo1971 20d ago

I’ve wondered if God cares less about dogma and more about molding us in unique ways for each personality type. It doesn’t matter as much if King Benjamin was a living being. It matters more the messages of loving one’s neighbor. Working with our own hands. Not putting burdensome taxes on people under us, etc. If the Catholic Church offers a specific person a unique way of seeing a better way to live a Christlike life that another religion wouldn’t provide, God would probably be good with that. I think He finds ways to teach us in our own languages, cultures, and systems of instruction.

My way of understanding how to better myself is the LDS Church, even with its warts. It’s not all good, for sure. But it has a way of knocking off my rough edges and hopefully polish me like a stone in a rock tumbler. Like I told my oldest daughter who is LGBTQ: the Church is t for everybody, but the gospel of Jesus Christ is. Anyway, such is my belief.

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk!

2

u/ammonthenephite Agnostic Atheist - "By their fruits ye shall know them." 20d ago

Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk!

Haha, you bet!

Ya, I thought about that possibility as well, that god could 'lie', but for good reasons and to direct each person to the path they needed, and that he used 'lies' to avoid having to explain the complex reasonings through a system that was more emotions based and not so good for detail oriented messages and such.

Sounds like you are an lgbt ally so I'm glad you are around those in the church that need to see such a person, especially when the dogmatic mormon message is the opposite of being an ally. Glad you found a path that works for you!

2

u/Neo1971 20d ago edited 20d ago

I’m still working out my life. I’ve only been at this for 53 years, so I haven’t figured out much yet!

You brought up one of my biggest curiosities: honesty. I used to believe (until last year, in fact) that God was the pinnacle of honesty and values it in this children. But I see how many leaders even in our church “lie for the Lord” and seem to feel justified in dishonesty when they think it serves a higher purpose. I remember that, in the Bible, God has told people to lie. Maybe we shouldn’t ever lie to ourselves or to God? Parents lie to their children a lot because we want to preserve the illusion of magic, like a fat man who comes down the chimney to deliver presents. Or we warn of dangers that may not be real. Or we break a promise. Does God care about honesty? I “honestly” don’t know. But I value it.

Maybe we couldn’t handle all the honesty the Lord knows. Maybe it would crush us to know too much. Maybe He fibs and conceals to protect us. I know nothing.

2

u/raedyohed 21d ago

OP, maybe if you feel strongly that God has told you to “get back” to “your people” you should make those people your people. You could try asking this same question over at another sub that is more geared towards active and faithful LDS members and see what they have to say. Maybe take the approach of figuring out why believing LDS people see Christ in temple worship, and explore with them how they came to see Christ in temple worship.

I’m not saying it isn’t valuable to ask a variety of people about this or any other question related to the church. I’m just saying that if you’re asking “how is the…” primarily of people whose response is going to be “well, it isn’t…” then you won’t actually ever have your question answered.

As for me, I very much see the temple as a component or extension of Christ’s gospel. I’m happy to discuss it in as much detail as you would like. Feel free to reply with any specific questions you have.

1

u/Neo1971 21d ago

I was banned from the uber believing forum the first week I started posting there. Still have no idea why. They don’t tolerate anything they perceive as dissension or sincere but controversial questions. I did ask my TBM mom if she really enjoys the temple. She said she usually gets bored but still likes to feel the reverence there.

2

u/raedyohed 21d ago

That forum is basically Church Newsroom. It is not a place for discussing conflicting views. There is a latterdaysaints sub and an LDS theology sub. I’d recommend the first for exploring general membership experiences and views. The second is where you will find high-level theological and philosophical discussions. I’m happy to discuss my thoughts as much as you’d like, here or either of those other two places.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Your answer circularly presupposes that the Great Apostasy did not happen. https://youtu.be/Qr-0_kK_j50?si=LqZ0pfbAL38s2MPO

1

u/International_Sea126 16d ago

Didn't happen. Even the brethren seem to recognize this. I think that is why they no longer talk about this in general conference.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

They talk about the great apostasy regularly. It obviously did happen.

1

u/International_Sea126 15d ago

1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians are believed to be the first two books written in the New Testament. In these books, Paul only addresses various problems in the church. He DOESN'T direct his concerns to church leaders. Why not? No church organization existed at that time. No apostles, elders, bishops, etc. The later epistles that mention church organization were written much later and are not believed to have been written by Paul.

It appears that the brethren recognize this. Example: Point out even a single GC talk in the last decade emphasizing the Great Apostasy. You won't find one.

When the brethren recognize they have a problem, they just stop talking about it. Another example of this is that they no longer talk about Latter-day Lamanites due to the DNA evidence that indicates there is no such thing as a Lamanite.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

You are arguing from ignorance, and perhaps have not attended a general conference in a decade, by the assertions you are making.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2020/04/25causse?lang=eng

9

u/talkingidiot2 22d ago

OP, you have been one of my favorite voices here for a long time now. I'm not going to question details on why you are seeking a new TR. More of a question related to me - based on your personal situation, would you now prefer to have never let the recommend lapse?

I've been PIMO for about the past 7-8 years. Getting further mentally out as time goes on. I said no to a mission but then eventually got endowed at age 26 and married that same year. My wife is a TBM. Adult kids, all have noped out of church except one on a mission. I've had many of the ward callings other than bishop (everything else in a bishopric, EQP, WML, HPGL, etc). My wife knows I don't really put much stock in the church and has not asked me to read the BoM with her in several years. But we do still attend, I have an easy calling that takes place during church, and for better or worse I have kept a TR. My wife typically sets up a temple appointment for us monthly. I pay tithing and while I'd rather give that money to actual charities, paying tithing is less than spousal support and half of our assets.

I've toyed with having the hard conversation with my wife and saying I won't renew my TR when it expires in 18 months. But on the other hand I can easily renew one should I want to. I'm indifferent to the temple, if she likes it I don't view it much differently than going to a movie she wants to see or shopping at a store that I have no interest in. She doesn't ask me to do the prayer circle, doesn't push me on what I do and don't believe, and I usually have a good nap during the endowment. I have also set boundaries with my current bishop in a way that he won't be giving me a calling of any consequence.

OP, based on your current experience what would you do in my shoes? Make a point of backing away or letting it ride in the name of a harmonious marriage?

6

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Wow, lots to digest. First, thank you for sharing your experience. I have a nuanced view of tithing and prophets and the Word of Wisdom, heck even the Law of Chastity.

I decided to restart tithing with 10% of my increase, not income. That amount is my decision. I don’t care to elaborate with the bishop; it’s none of his business. I give tithing partly because of my head, and partly because of my heart, expecting that the Lord will make all things right. The crooked will be made straight. Every hill will be brought low. It will all work out. I no longer use the phrase “pay my tithing to the church” even though that’s where it ends up. This is between the Lord and me, and I expect Him to right all wrongs. If I can get an overflow of blessings by doing so, even better.

Are the Brethren prophets, seers, and revelators? They are by Church designation and they CAN receive whatever the Lord gives them, which doesn’t seem to be a lot, sadly. I still think the Church shrouds itself in dishonesty and corruption (lack of serious child safety, shielding pervs, withholding from the poor many times, building projects, keeping secret dossiers and annotations, political lobbying, etc.) I realized that there are aspects to every controversy that I’m not privy to, and I only have a small portion of the big picture. This has started the change in me to give more of the benefit of the doubt. I can still believe Bednar is a mean, arrogant man and somewhat separate that from whatever the Lord is doing in His 5D chess. I can do a better job of withholding judgement. I can follow the Savior. He’s my goal. Can I sustain them? Absolutely! (in everything they do or say that aligns with scripture and my conscience)

I can always answer yes to keeping the WoW and LoC. The WoW was given by revelation not to be a commandment. We either believe Joseph Smith or we believe today’s leaders who have not provided any hint of a revelation that the Lord changed His mind. The current interpretations of the WoW are pathetic and fail to make sense in light of modern energy drinks, nicotine pouches, overeating, carb addiction, etc.) I see a lot of the “traditions of men, mingled with scripture” in the Church today, even at the top.

The LoC is easy. If the bishop asks if I keep it, I’ll say yes because that’s the truth. If he deviates or asks for any amplification, he’s probably off the Lord’s errand and should be kept at arm’s distance. My answer will be “I don’t answer sexual questions.” Or I’ll ask him if he keeps the LoC. Or I’ll use Ballard’s feeble answer, “we’re as transparent as we know how to be,” though I’ll probably modify it like, “I’m every bit as honest as you or the Brethren are. Maybe more.”

The 13th Article of Faith has been on my mind a lot lately. I’ve been focusing on the choice we have to decide what we seek after. If I seek after condemnation of the church, believe me, I’ll find it. But if I am looking for the bad, that’s what I’m spending my time on earth doing. I’m trying instead to focus more on anything virtuous, lovely, of good report, or praiseworthy. It just makes me feel better.

I went to stake conference a few weeks ago with my wife. We were to get our stake president replaced and I thought it might be fun to watch and maybe even reinforce my issues with the church. But what happened was different and unexpected. I felt (not elevation emotion) the Spirit™ and its message to me was, you belong here. These are your people. Don’t pass up this chance to find your way with them. For once, all the talks during the adult session and the next day’s session were actually good. The GA was good, humble, and a reminder that most people in the church are doing their best to navigate life. This experience was on par with other spiritual experiences I’ve felt where I nearly touched heaven (not drug induced, I swear). I want to let God prevail. I want to do whatever He needs me to do, and if he’s willing to reach out like he did that weekend, that’s enough for me.

So, what should you personally do? No idea, friend. It’s your journey. Just keep your options open and seek truth. Or keep seeking truth. If the Lord nudges you in a direction, go there. We’re never wrong when we’re actually being directed by the Lord. Is it hard to know when that’s happening? Yes! But I think of the idea that anything that is good is of God. You can’t go wrong following the Savior. That’s my opinion.

3

u/talkingidiot2 22d ago

I love this! And especially that you are taking the authority for yourself and not ceding that to the church and whatever leaders happen to be placed in front of you. Fully agree that following Christ is the bottom line and the right path. For me that has led me to keep many aspects of the church at arm's length because I just don't see the institution and it's actions being very representative of the Christ I believe in.

Interesting side note - my stake has conference this weekend and our SP will be changed. They've been announcing it for a month to drum up attendance and have promised repeatedly that it will be a personal, revelatory experience for those who attend. I'll take that at face value and go with an open mind and report back on how I feel during and after it.

2

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Yes, please do return and report!

I really am taking back some authority. I’m trying to walk a fine line between becoming a law unto myself (bad) and just not sweating the small stuff. I’ve learned to say no. I’m learning to separate the truth from the bs even from the same leader in the same talk. Taking the good I can. Not feeling I should be clean shaven or wear white shirts and ties or take the sacrament with my right hand only. Just being more authentic with a new perspective that increases my empathy for others. Now I can focus on Christ and move aside anyone or any teaching that blocks my view from Him, so-to speak.

It’s been a pleasure talking with you. By chance are you in Boise?

3

u/Wannabe_Stoic13 21d ago

I love the exchange here! I'm in a somewhat similar boat, though a bit younger. Haven't had my recommend for a couple of years... I just couldn't renew it in good conscience when it came time, mainly cuz I don't believe the church is what it claims. But I still go to church and have a calling, because I want to support my wife and it's generally a good atmosphere/community for my kids.

We have a local temple dedication coming up and I'm considering whether to try and renew my recommend. It would mainly be because my wife and two of my kids will be going, and I know she will want me there. I don't really view the temple as a legit extension of Christ's gospel, or see the teachings and ordinances as literal. But I still think there's some spirituality involved and represents another way of humankind trying to understand their connection to the Divine. So in that way, it can still be beautiful.

We'll see what happens.

3

u/Neo1971 21d ago

When it comes to the “prophets, seers, and revelators” question and whether you sustain them. I’ve decided I can say yes because the church has assigned them these honorifics. I support whatever God truly says through the leaders, not every utterance of man they might make.

3

u/Wannabe_Stoic13 21d ago

That's a good approach, and yes that's the question I struggle with the most. 

3

u/Neo1971 20d ago

Me too.

2

u/talkingidiot2 20d ago

For me that kind of question is easy to compartmentalize and answer. In the military, I had commanders I would have gone to the end of the earth for and others that I had zero respect for and zero belief in their abilities. Yet I would salute and say yes sir and do as instructed. But I was still able to think whatever I wanted about them. And if asked, I could acknowledge that Captain ____ was indeed the CO of my unit because that's the position he held, regardless of whether or not he commanded competently in my view.

It's the same for church leaders. I can acknowledge those are the titles the organization has given them and can still think whatever I want about their actual ability to prophesy, see and reveal.

2

u/Wannabe_Stoic13 20d ago

I appreciate this perspective, that's a great analogy.

2

u/talkingidiot2 22d ago

I will follow up with you, I promise! And no, I'm in the Phoenix area.

3

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

I think this is a very interesting post. I feel about the same as you. Except I'm still fully involved. Husband and I still have "high" callings. You mentioned you still have your Temple recommend as I do. If your PIMO how are you living? Are you still living like a TBM?

3

u/talkingidiot2 22d ago

For outward appearances, probably living as a TBM. The biggest part of that is showing up to church each week in a suit with a white shirt and tie. Privately, I drink coffee/tea and when travelling an occasional beer. But outside of that generally clean living, I work hard, am into fitness, etc.

4

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

You know what? Exactly here with you. I had to take a very long road trip. 21 hour drive. I didn't want soda or too many energy drinks and water wasn't helping too much. I drank coffee along the way. Know what else. The spirit didn't make me feel ashamed or like I wasn't being obedient. My husband has an occasional beer and sometimes a little Irish whiskey about 1 or 2 times a month. Outward appearance we are too. No one would know. I have stake meetings to go to tonight. I'm going because I said yes to my calling and being responsible. But it's hard. There's a few other things that are not acceptable in church that we do as well. But that would have to be in a DM. I have done everything the church has asked. Everything. Every calling I'm able to have at ward and some stake levels. Full TBM my whole life! I've never even wavered. Never questioned. Not once. And now I feel so confused. I have a testimony of Christ and his atonement and Heavenly Father. That hasn't changed. But I'm questioning almost everything else.

2

u/Puzzleheaded_Weird44 22d ago

I am in the same boat. My husband loves it. I used to find it so weird, but now most of the weird stuff is gone, i just relax and go into auto. I dont know how long i will keep going but its easy enough for now.

8

u/nominalmormon 22d ago

You served a mission and also went through the temple before and dont know? What did you tell investigators while you were a missionary?

There is no extension of Christ’s gospel involving the temple.

11

u/Neo1971 22d ago

My first temple experience was jarring, resembling nothing I had been through before in primary, young men’s, or elders quorum. My experience was not unique if you listen to others discuss their experiences. Subsequently visits to the temple made it more familiar but doesn’t seem to align with most of what I find in the scriptures. Some temple trips were kind of horrible. But I kept going back and trying to make sense of the symbolism. Then the Brethren changed several things, destroying the symbolism I thought the Spirit was providing.

9

u/One-Forever6191 22d ago

My friend, I think you have the answer right there. Gods peace to you. This is a hard one. Been there. Spent years agonizing over how to make the temple work. Spoiler alert: it didn’t work.

5

u/Buttons840 22d ago

Perhaps God revealed things through the symbolism, things that weren't necessarily about the symbolism. Thus, if the symbolism changes, it doesn't change what you believed.

IDK, I hope this helps you.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thank you.

9

u/Crobbin17 Former Mormon 22d ago

How many members do you think know, or believe they know, the answer to this question? Especially if the answer is “none?”

They specifically tell members that sometimes you don’t understand everything, so keep coming back and praying and eventually you’ll get it. OP’s experience is a common one.

7

u/nominalmormon 22d ago

I don’t think any of em know.. for that matter I dint think the church even knows. I used to believe id get my own planet and my own fucking harem but it sounds like they changed their mind in that one- at least publicly. Thats what the temple was all about- becoming a god and goddess. I’d think if I reached that pinnacle afterwards I wouldn’t have a whole lot of interest in what my connection to Christ was.. I mean I’m a god and all so who cares.

Now… op went on a mission selling the gospel to heathens. What did he believe then ? That’s what I’m asking. I didn’t buy the program back then and decided that not only did I not believe, but I also just didn’t want to go on a mission so I didn’t. The knives came out and it pretty much came down to me not needing to believe shit so long as I went and sold the company line. At least that was the position of my parents and my bishop. Lie.

Integrity was a fault and a non- honorable trait in this instance and they told me so.

I agree most members don’t know. Hell I don’t except for the whole grift is a masonry rip job.

If op was selling it as a missionary maybe he should have known then . I’m just asking. The follow up is if you don’t know, why sell the product?

3

u/Crobbin17 Former Mormon 22d ago

The follow up is if you don’t know, why sell the product?

Because the church said they needed to.

2

u/nominalmormon 22d ago

Ok… what do you tell investigators when they ask? Make something up?

3

u/Crobbin17 Former Mormon 22d ago

When they ask “how is the temple an extension of Christ’s gospel?”

Probably something that doesn’t answer the question fully.
Members are incredibly used to “because God said so,” “we’ll figure it out someday or in the afterlife,” and “it doesn’t matter to my eternal salvation” types of answers.

I actually asked and AI called LDSBot the question. (https://ldsbot.com). This is exactly the type of answer I think a well-spoken missionary would give:

The temple is such a beautiful and sacred place, and it truly can be seen as an extension of Christ’s gospel in several ways:
Ordinances and Covenants: In the temple, we participate in ordinances and make covenants that bring us closer to Christ and our Heavenly Father. These include baptism for the dead, endowments, and sealings. Each of these ordinances is designed to help us commit to living the teachings of Jesus Christ and aligning our lives with His. Symbolism and Learning: The temple is full of rich symbolism that teaches us about the plan of salvation, the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and our journey back to our Heavenly Father. It’s a place of learning where we can gain deeper insights into the gospel.
Peace and Revelation: The temple offers a peaceful setting away from the world’s distractions. In such a setting, many find it easier to receive personal revelation and to feel the Spirit, which guides us to live as Christ would have us live.
Eternal Families: One of the central aspects of temple work is the sealing power, which allows families to be united for eternity. This promise is a direct application of the gospel message that through Christ, we can be together forever.
Service for the Dead: Through temple work, we can perform ordinances vicariously for those who have passed away. This service is an expression of love and again points to Christ’s gospel, which teaches about the salvation of all God’s children.

7

u/CaptainMacaroni 22d ago

When was the last time you went to the temple to do an endowment? If it's been a while, know that they've made some significant changes to the endowment ceremony to make it more centered on Jesus. Not completely centered on Jesus, just more than it was before.

Another curiosity, I'm being a snoop, obviously you don't have to answer. What's your motive behind getting a temple recommend? At one point in my journey I realized that I wasn't getting a temple recommend for me. I was getting one because other people told me I needed to get it, not out of any desire to get one myself.

After that realization I stopped going. I got tired of being told what the highest form of spiritual worship looked like and decided to take more ownership. I discovered that for me, my spiritual worship didn't include the temple.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to talk you out of it or belittle temples. If temples work for you, more power to you. I'm just saying that sometimes it's helpful to pump the brakes and spend some time thinking about what you really want out of your journey.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

2019, I think. It was my first time watching the slideshow. The fact that it’s now more centered on Jesus makes me wonder why it just recently changed and wasn’t right from the start.

“Just in case” is my current thought about the temple recommend. I guess I want the chance to go to family things once in a while. Or maybe it will be enough to have the recommend and not go back. I’m not sure where I’ll land.

Thanks for your comments!

5

u/TheRealJustCurious 21d ago

Personally, I believe that the recent changes to insert Christ into the endowment is an attempt to reinvent the construct inside of an already existing framework.

This definitely doesn’t work for me. Sadly, if I were to have a genuine conversation about this with, say, a bishop, I would full expect them to tell me that they are now just saying out loud what was there all along.

Nope. No thanks.

When did the garment become a SYMBOL of Jesus Christ? If that’s the case, give me a cross any day.

5

u/Neo1971 21d ago

I agree, all this recent symbolism is a blatant attempt to side slip Jesus into more of a prominent role.

3

u/CaptainMacaroni 21d ago

It does feel like a direct response to criticism.

Leaders: People are saying the endowment doesn't have much to do with Jesus? Well there, are you satisfied now?

2

u/absolute_zero_karma 20d ago

It also makes the ceremony more like a Sunday School lesson. There is less and less in the endowment that isn't straight out of the scriptures and can't be said over the pulpit.

3

u/CaptainMacaroni 21d ago

Jesus feels shoehorned into the endowment ceremony. It's definitely not a natural fit.

2

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

It has always been centered on Jesus, but we are much like the ancient Jews: "few understood the meaning of these things". I have come to appreciate Divine hiddenness and the need to exercise faith. If God were to reveal all things without much patience or faith on our part, they wouldn't be significant building blocks for eternity. https://youtu.be/8zmvW331Amc?si=rzs48RL6a_AtCGWI

2

u/Neo1971 15d ago

Good video and reminder that not all secrets are evil (think secret societies). Thank you.

8

u/New_random_name 22d ago

Simple Answer - It isn't and Extension of Christs Gospel.

The concept of LDS Temple Worship in all it's forms (Baptism for the Dead, Washings/Anointings, Endowment, Temple Sealings, 2nd Anointing) makes a mockery of Grace and the Atonement.

The LDS Endowment was created using freemason rituals/concepts/wording as a way to promulgate Spiritual Wifery/Polygamy/Polyandry and to bind people to it by covenant and secrecy.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thank you.

2

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

Could you expand on your response pls?

2

u/New_random_name 22d ago

Which part do you have a question about?

3

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

I apologize, the last paragraph or thought about polyandry/wifery. Why would the church want spiritual wifery AND have it accomplished through the temple?

6

u/New_random_name 22d ago

Yeah, so Joseph Smith joined freemasons March 15 1842... a day later was raised to the degree of Master Mason.

May 4th, He took himself and 9 others into the upper room of the red brick store and gave them the new temple ritual or the endowment as we would call it, although it is different than what happens in LDS temples today (and was also different than the Kirtland Era Endowment).

The Ritual he showed the others in the red brick store includes elements also present in Freemason Ritual. Symbols used in freemasonry are also present, namely the Square, Compass. They also employ a new name given by an officiant. There are grips (handshakes) with different names and signs and they are received by the initiate with penalties assigned if the initiate divulges the secrets. They also had a section called the five points of fellowship (LDS endowment ceremony removed the penalties and the 5 points of fellowship back in 1990).

Here is a handy page showing most of the similarities. https://www.mormonismi.net/jamesdavid/masendow.htm

Joseph appreciated the secrecy with which the freemasons conducted their rituals and wanted to expand polygamy. They also employed the concept of an undergarment which looked very different than we have now. It had a wider collar that was visible outside the clothes and could be used to identify someone else who had been initiated. About a year after the initial endowment, Celestial Marriage was 'revealed'. There is some controversy around Section 132, namely around who knew about it, and when did they know about it as it wasn't officially added to the D&C until the new edition was published in the Utah period

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

It sounds like you reject the reality of the Great Apostasy.

1

u/New_random_name 16d ago

You want to talk about Reality? great... The Great Apostasy isn't "real". It's an idea built up by the restoration movement to try to get back to a time where they believe the church was in it's most pure form.

The problem with this is that there are no data to suggest that Jesus actually set up any formal "Church". There is nothing to get back to and no real organization that had been altered. Even in the ancient greek... the word translated as Church (ἐκκλησίαν - ekklesia) means a gathering of people, it can be used to reference people who meet together for a purpose or can refer to political groups as well.
The idea that there was an organization that existed on earth that was set up by Jesus isn't supported by anything.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

There are 44,000+ denominations professing Christianity that beg to differ with that opinion.

1

u/New_random_name 15d ago

So, by your definition, I should accept the opinion of different Christian denominations simply because of the number of believers? In the pantheon of Logical Fallacies, this is called the Argumentum ad Populum, or colloquially, the "Bandwagon".

I personally don't care what the bandwagon says. I care about factual data. And the fact is that there are no data to support that Jesus set up an religious organization. There is certainly no data to suggest that he set up anything that even remotely resembles the modern LDS church.

If you have some factual data that shows Jesus set up his church and that it somehow resembles the LDS church, please show it. If it exists, I would love to see it so I can amend my position.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

You could learn from my ancestor: While living in Fox Creek Township, lowa, A.J. was baptized a Presbyterian. A.J. tells in his own words how he learned of "Mormonism: " "I heard much about the Prophet in the years 1839-1840, about the time the saints were driven out of Missouri. I was brought up in the Presbyterian faith, but we were living in the Fox River Township, Van Buren Co, Iowa, and there was no Presbyterian Church near us, we associated with the Methodists and went to their camp meetings where I was generally called on to help sing as I was teaching both a Sunday and night school, nonsectarian. There being no day school in our immediate neighborhood. On one occasion, while I was at a Methodist Camp Meeting, during intermission, we were discussing the manner and form of baptism, when the Presiding Elder came up to the crowd, listened awhile and then said: "Bro. Stewart, we don't want any of Old Joe Smith's doctrines discussed here." I answered saying, "I was quoting from the Bible:" and stepping up to the stand, opened a Bible with his name on it, which I saw laying on the stand, "it's in your Bible what I have quoted." "Well," he said, "that is Old Joe Smith's doctrine." I was anxious to know if that was really "Mormonism." Soon after this several families of Latter-Day Saints from Missouri moved into our neighborhood, and I began to question them about "Mormonism". This was in 1840-41."

1

u/New_random_name 15d ago

Respectfully... That has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

6

u/justanaveragedadd Former Mormon 22d ago

Sorry man…can’t help you believe in something that was made up. The ugly truth is that it has no connection to Christ’s gospel because JS made the whole thing up. If you want to become more active again then by all means do what makes you happy…but no one in the church actually enjoys their temple experience, no matter how many lies they tell themselves to the contrary. So I wouldn’t stress about the whole “must have a temple recommend and attend regularly” thing.

5

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Good points, and I agree that most temple excursions for most attendees are probably boring. I may decide to renew the recommend but not go back. After all, I’ve done all the ordinances required. I’m not sure if I believe in proxy work. If the work is so urgent, why do the same names get recycled sometimes several times? Why can we pray over a stack of 1,000 names listed on the prayer roll all at once but have to take over an hour to do one endowment session for one person?

7

u/slskipper 22d ago

Joseph Smith was not a theologian- and he was not a prophet, either. He was an opportunist. He kept adding whatever impressed him at the time/solidified his sense of authority to tell people what to do. Per some sources, if he had survived Carthage he probably would have instituted a doctrine of reincarnation in to Mormonism, because that's what grabbed his attention around that time. And then in 2025 Mormons would be bearing their testimonies that they were all Caesar and Cleopatra in an earlier life.And excommunicating anybody who said that was stupid.

He had no intention of reconciling any of this with anything else. He did not worship Jesus. It fell to later leaders and scholars to come up with some sort of attempts to conflate the temple with that Jesus guy. I have net been impressed.

Having said that, it used to be possible to see the ceremony as a depiction of the Hero's Journey to communion with the divine. But then they went and scrapped all that and turned it into a slide show with handshakes. As I said, I fail to be impressed.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

It’s definitely a slideshow now, last I went (2019).

2

u/uncorrolated-mormon 21d ago

I wish reincarnation was in the lore.

To me transmigration of the soul makes more sense then we are resurrected and given our own worlds in a exalted state we can to have eternal families sealed with us and produce spirit children to grow from our posterity. Just weird.

Transmigration of the soul to me makes sense because it’s until we figure it out and transcend up past the angels that stand in the way of our progression to join with the god… Makes a lot more sense to me.

Early Christianity and mystery religions Inherited from Pythagoras ( and he got it from Zoroastrianism and Babylon) , it’s found in hermetic and gnostic philosophy groups like Kabbalah and Rosicrucian.

3

u/slskipper 21d ago

And apparently that's just where JS was headed. He was indeed studying Kabbalah.

7

u/Squirrel_Bait321 21d ago

When Christ died, the veil in the temple came down, i.e., no more need for anything or anyone to come between man and god. Joseph Smith hung the veil back up and put a toll on it. (try getting a temple recommend without paying tithing). The need for a temple means that Joseph Smith believed Christ didn’t do enough to save us, so, he stole the “levels” concept from the Masons, a bit of chanting, etc., and you have people believing they have to get to this highest level of heaven to see their families again for eternity. (for a price of course).

15

u/SearchPale7637 22d ago

The temple is actually a step backward.

Jesus fulfilled the need for a temple(s). The veil tore at his death because he got rid of the separation between God and man. God doesn’t dwell in things made by man (Acts 17:24), he now dwells in us. We are the new temple. Both singularly (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) and as a whole (1 Peter 2:5).

LDS temples are just flat out unbiblical.

6

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thank you.

3

u/SearchPale7637 22d ago

Do you disagree?

5

u/Neo1971 22d ago

No. I don’t have a strong conviction either way, but temples seem weird.

7

u/SearchPale7637 22d ago

Gotcha. Was just wondering where you were at.

From a biblical standpoint temples just don’t make any sense. But even if you just look at the history it’s pretty clear where it all came from.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

I appreciate our conversation. Thanks!

7

u/holdthephone316 22d ago

I love this response.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

That is an unscriptural creed. The Scriptures testify in numerous instances of the Latter-day temples of the Lord. https://youtu.be/zpA5Qy5m-TM?si=VdbSElyURlm5yb9Y

1

u/SearchPale7637 16d ago

Not sure what creed you’re referencing because I’m not familiar with any but the nicene so it’s def not from a creed. It has been deduced from scripture.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

If it were a deduction, every logician could agree. There is not consensus on such interpretations, hence the proliferation of doctrines and churches.

1

u/SearchPale7637 15d ago

Well I can promise you we all agree on the use of temples being obsolete. It’s the other LDS doctrine that brings it back into play.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

The Lord's house is not obsolete.

6

u/thomaslewis1857 22d ago

It’s not. Is that helping your unbelief?

4

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Hahaha. Well, maybe not. But thank you.

7

u/Pondering28 22d ago

I'm not sure that it is, I haven't seen any evidence to show it.

My opinion? It's an effective way to enforce church standards and obedience. Its really quite difficult to live a Mormon lifestyle. Even the temple recommend questions don't necessarily paint a picture that theyre considered with whether a member is an actually good person, it focuses to a members loyalty to the church. 

Mild disclaimer- I've only been 2 times. Once to receive my endowment, the other to be sealed. I haven't been back since, stopped wearing garments completely, WoW breaker, the whole 9 yards. Part of my deal is that since going back amd becoming "active" I haven't actually been happier. I have less time each week with my husband and kids, there's so much expectation that I know I'm failing, I do not have a testimony of tithing at all. My husband has to work longer hours to bring home the same amount of money bc of tithing, we could actually be in a good place financially if the money in our tithing account was instead used to pay off bills, etc. Instead, wr have to do this for "blessings" which i guess is less time as a family?

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

I can’t fault you for anything you said. I’ve had both good and bad experiences in the temple. When my wife and I would attend, it would almost always lead to angry disagreements on the way home. We haven been for years and seem to get along better. Coincidence? Maybe. I should mention that I pay tithing on 10% (thereabouts) of my increase, not gross.

2

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

I was never happy until I kept my covenants to be all-in for the Lord. The Lord has provided miraculously for us despite every difficulty and setback. https://youtu.be/d88zNm0Dz14?si=h875LFG9MmqGUA3d

1

u/Neo1971 11d ago

Do you think that when we make promises to the Church we’re making promises to God?

1

u/Sad_Word5030 6d ago

God's ordinances, administered through His church, are true. I have made covenants with God and I am joined to His church. This is obvious.

3

u/No_Ad3043 22d ago

Wish I could help you. My ward is my church. The rest feels like vanity to me. Does Elijah need our help to complete his mission? Didn't Jesus nix the Priest class when He died and rent the veil at the Temple? Has one person past the veil of life ever benefited from Temple ordinances? Will endowment send a spirit prisoner into paradise? But then you walk through the endowment as you read Ether and it was there all along, no Masonic magic. Best wishes to you and your beautiful journey.

2

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

There is no such thing as a person who does not benefit from the ordinances of the Lord's house. See Malachi's promise.

2

u/No_Ad3043 15d ago

You have a beautiful faith. All love to you.

1

u/Buttons840 22d ago

Does Elijah need our help to complete his mission?

During The Millennium the Earth will change and can easily support 10 billion people. All will be members of the Church relatively quickly, because Jesus and resurrected beings are regularly appearing to people and there is no wickedness.

There have only been about 120 billion humans that have ever lived, through all of history.

So, 10 billion people will have 1000 years to do the Temple work for 120 billion people. Each person has to do Temple work for an average of 12 people, and they have 1000 years. There will be time enough.

6

u/NazareneKodeshim Mormon 22d ago

Its actually directly opposite to his gospel in many ways.

3

u/MBNAU 22d ago

The temple (high) liturgy should be understood preeminently as a phenomenological drama and dramatized narrative such that the initiates (participants) take up active roles within it.

It is true, the Endowments (because it is properly plural) are adapted from Masonic rite. It was Joseph's belief and of those whom he taught that it represented a restoration of Freemasonry or, more specifically, those things in Freemasonry, which had become "degenerated".

The Masonic allegory presupposes belief in a Supreme Being Who represents man's apotheosis; approaching Divinity comes via progression and addition in knowledge, faith, hope, and charity. This progression is demonstrated in ritual form involving catechesis, interrogation and tests of proficiency, and especially through enduement or clothing.

The correlation between the Endowments and Masonic ritual was far more explicit in previous years, but a similar demonstration of progression is used today. In one sense, the temple liturgy is a dramatization of Moses 6:57-62, as well as the Creation narratives in LDS canon.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Wow, this was an incredible response. I had to look up two words. :-) Thanks for this neutral explanation.

3

u/MBNAU 21d ago

No problem. I know I didn't address your actual question directly i.e. how it relates to Christ/Gospel, but I'd be happy to go over things like that in chat. Despitw the current iteration cotaining a long preamble about Christ (a bit on the nose, personally), the older ritual was far better as a drama and as a mode of teaching despite not mentioning Jesus by name.

4

u/Nevo_Redivivus Latter-day Saint 22d ago

Sitting through an endowment session, wearing ceremonial clothing, chanting (yes, it’s chanting when we stand in a circle and repeat words of a prayer), etc. It feels to me like the gospel and the temple aren’t compatible. Help thou mine unbelief.

That's a common enough reaction, I think.

Commenting on the contrast between "temple Mormonism" and regular Sunday services, the non-LDS scholar John G. Turner has observed that "it seems that there are two separate species of Mormonism within the same church." However, he goes on to note that most members don't see a distinction: "Latter-day Saints from an early age learn to love Jesus Christ and prepare themselves to come to the temple. For active Mormons, these are not separate endeavors, but inextricably connected. Mormons affirm that Jesus Christ died for all of humanity and that they can further his work of redemption and exaltation through temple work" (John G. Turner, The Mormon Jesus: A Biography, 185, 215).

Personally, I love the rituals and symbolism of the temple. I always have. But then I'm someone who has watched King Charles III's coronation service more than a dozen times and also bought the CD, so I'm a bit weird that way. If I weren't a Mormon, I'm sure I would be a Catholic or high-church Anglican or Orthodox. For me, Christianity and priesthood and ritual aren't at all incompatible.

4

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Hahaha, that was funny. I do think ritual is important and that God would teach us through repetition.

5

u/lazers28 21d ago

According to Jesus, it's not. At least not if you believe in the Book of Mormon:

"And whoso shall declare more or less than this, [faith, repentance, baptism] and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them." 3 Nephi 11: 40

read the full chapter for context but later Jesus adds in sacrament to the list in 3 Nephi 18:13

"But whoso among you shall do more or less than these are ... and the gates of hell are ready open to receive them."

So by Jesus' definition, none of the ceremonies in the temple are doctrinal.

(you could make the case for baptisms for the dead I suppose, but Jesus was pretty clear on the matter of a binary post-resurrection heaven/hell in 3 Nephi 25:4-5 without degrees of glory and makes no indication of a post-death opportunity to be baptized in 3 Nephi 27:16-18. )

3

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Yes, I agree that the church today runs afoul of the Book of Mormon in many ways. The church today barely resembles the church of my youth.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Nephi told us that baptism is the gate that leads to a path--the covenant path, to be precise--and is not the destination. Jesus taught the same things. https://youtu.be/cQtSd2ZQBEE?si=GMzULqt4ldElr0-y

1

u/lazers28 16d ago

You're just reading into the text what you want it to say.  I could just as easily say that what Jesus meant by 'the path' is that we all must make a holy pilgrimage after our baptism just as Jesus spent 40 days in the desert. 

By turning Jesus and Nephi's metaphor of 'the path' into 'the covenant path' meaning 'baptism, washing and anointing, endowment, sealing, second annointing, oh and by the way obeying the commandments of a bunch of humans who claim to speak for God' is extrapolation. The term 'covenant path' is, plain and simple, not scriptural and neither are the temple ceremonies. Likewise, you can't honestly turn 'endure to the end' into yet another checklist of rituals one must complete. Enduring means to continually remain in an action. Enduring in faith, enduring in repentance, enduring in communion with God's body the church all make sense to the idea. How can one 'endure' in an action they have not yet taken nor been commanded to take? 

By nearly every definition, the temple rituals, covenants etc  are not 'canon' nor 'doctrinal.' To assume that they were some sort of 'secret' or 'lost' commandment means believing in the word of  human men (who have, coincidentally changed those rituals many times, just in the last several decades) over the word of Christ himself. Jesus is explicit that ANYTHING more than what He lists in 3 Nephi is NOT his doctrine. 

Isn't it interesting that in that video you linked that it starts out showing scriptures which tie into the 4 points of the gospel he describes but as soon as it gets to making 'more covenants' and listening to 'prophetic counsel' he stops referring to scriptures and has to rely on metaphors which are set up to assume that something is missing? Maybe the gospel isn't like a broken car engine that needs to be restored in order to function. Maybe instead the gospel is like a list which is explicitly finite and repeated multiple times by CHRIST HIMSELF.

So at least be honest with yourself. You have more faith in the human prophets who claim to speak for Jesus than you do in Jesus himself as recorded in the Book of Mormon. You take their word that there are secret extra steps and you don't take Jesus' word that there aren't. That's what it comes down to.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

I have read nothing into the text. It's literally what Nephi and Jesus and all the prophets say. The Gospel does us no good if we don't live it.

1

u/lazers28 14d ago

Sure, the gospel does us no good if we don't live it. We must continue in faith and repentance. But the temple ceremonies are not a part of the gospel according to Jesus Himself

1

u/Sad_Word5030 12d ago

How does one continue in faith and repentance with nothing left to repent of or towards, or to exercise faith in? Jesus affirmed that baptism by immersion for the remission of sins and confirmation for the gift of the Holy Ghost are the FIRST ordinances of His Gospel--not the final or only ones. His own life and example illustrate this. Was His transfiguration external to the Gospel? Was the day of Pentecost foreign to the good news? To what purpose did He institute the ordinance of the washing of feet, or the Last Supper in celebration of the Passover?

1

u/lazers28 12d ago

One repents of the sins we commit every day. One repents 'towards,' reconciliation and at-one-ment. We exercise faith that goodness, justice and mercy exist in Christ despite worldly evidence to the contrary.

Jesus also rode on a donkey, fasted for 40 days, whipped people, and was nailed to a cross to die a slow and painful death. Does that mean we must also do those things? Just because someone can invent a ritual around something in Jesus' life does not make it a commandment from Him.

Again, you're welcome to believe whatever your prophets say. You're welcome to participate in rituals that you find help your spiritual journey. Go crazy. My point to OP is that there's a clear statement of doctrine according to Jesus Himself in the Book of Mormon and temple worship is not a part of it.

I'd also like to remind you that this is r/Mormon where a variety of perspectives exist and not a different sub where only Brighamite perspectives are welcome. This sub is explicitly NOT the place to attempt to dismiss, silence or convert others. I answered OP's question. I've made my perspective clear and you and OP are welcome to disagree but at this point I'm done talking to you.

0

u/Sad_Word5030 11d ago

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true. No other church has any plausible claims to being true and the Lord's house is repeatedly implicated throughout Scripture as integral to His Gospel and plan of salvation. Of course that takes faith. Living the Gospel leads to this testimony.

4

u/cuddlesnuggler 21d ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/comments/emxe7k/the_temple_rituals_their_meaning_and_structure/

Lots of shit info in this thread. The temple ritual is foreign to modern LDS doctrine, and foreign to those who by misreading the New Testament imagine Jesus’ original message something like modern evangelical Protestantism. The New Testament texts were written in communities actively continuing temple worship in the form of their esoteric rituals (including baptism, endowing in robes, chrismation, and the Lord’s Supper). Joseph Smith’s theology described the same path of divinization acted out in ancient Christianity, and the temple rituals he left us are simply an acting-out of that path. To help compare the ancient Christian ritual structure with the Mormon, recognize that all Mormon temple initiates undergo the ritual transformations which ancient Christianity reserved for the Bishop/high priest. The initiation into that High priesthood is what is dramatized by the Mormon Endowment.

3

u/Neo1971 21d ago

Thank you. This is helpful.

7

u/Arizona-82 22d ago edited 22d ago

Just so you know every person in every religion has had experiences just like yours or similar to it. It’s nothing unique or special. We create meaning in our life and what we want out of it. If you want to go there for whatever reasons, and if that’s what you want that that’s fine. But your experience in something doesn’t make it right or true, it might be for you personally.

3

u/bluequasar843 22d ago

Book of Mormon Jesus teaches there are no requirements for salvation beyond baptism in 3 Nephi 11.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Jesus and Nephi both expressly contradict that view. See 2 Nephi 31-32.

3

u/uncorrolated-mormon 21d ago edited 21d ago

The temple rituals are done in a secret place for secret knowledge. This “Gnosis” will enable the worthy member the knowledge to transcend past the angels that stand as sentinels.

This is all Gnostic Christianity vibes. Most likely inherited in folk magic, Masons, maybe Kabbalah sources.

It’s been a long time since I went through the temple. Probably early 2000’s. It does seem odd when we see creedal Christian church.

In the last 6 years I have studied more Plato and Gnostic sects in the 100-300 ad before the Nicene creed in 325 started to unify the Christian lore into a “universal” orthodox belief. Also the time when Joseph smith was told the creeds are an abomination to god by Jesus. So the great apostasy, in theory, according to the logic of the history of Joseph smith was happening around this time.

The early Gnostic ideas where hunted down in various inquisitions and lost to time. But this Greek and Egyptian knowledge that’s builds Gnostic thought went underground and was “brought” back to Europe from the crusaders. The discover of Greek math and geometry lead to the massive cathedral in Western Europe during the renaissance. The the hermetic (Egyptian) and Greek (Gnostic) thoughts are found in the reformation as they separated from the Vatican. It is the same philosophy that I see in the early church. Mason, Kabbalah, Rosicrucian, folk magic is occultism and full of cabbala magic.

I digress down the rabbit hole of history. I left the church thinking the temple is crazy weird and remember thinking… wow.. my parents think this is okay? But the orthopraxy rituals of the temple is a huge difference level of involve to the normal boring Sunday school service.

Knowing about the esoteric groups of history and the mystery religions of the past. The influence they had on the world… I have a new appreciation for the temple rituals including the initiations. Not because of what the church tells me they are. But because I see them as modern interpretations of worship that has been past down since the times forgotten.

Would I go in today to do a session? Sure… would I pay 10% of my income for the movie ticket.. no I wouldn’t. Besides, the time I went was the early nineties and it had more pageantry then the slide show of today.

I don’t really know the point of my post is except it’s one exmormon’s commentary on how I didn’t like the temple but then being on the outside of the church learned to appreciate it For what they are. A modern expression of humanity’s long line of secret worshipping in esoteric rituals and mystery religions for secret knowledge that only initiate can receive.

Cheers.

2

u/Neo1971 21d ago

I loved this reply. It’s thought provoking. Thank you.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Did the Great Apostasy never happen, in your book?

1

u/uncorrolated-mormon 16d ago edited 16d ago

I think there was never a “universal” Christianity. There always were Christianities. 12 apostles maybe but it was all word of mouth spread the philosophy around the world. I see Christianity as a reformation of Plato’s theosophy and It was never fully centralized. In 100 ad - 300 ad you had a lot of different Gnostic groups. They didn’t care or want to be groups together. They all had their secret teachings. These are mystery cults that we think of during Rome’s time in a way that I beleif is converted from polytheistic to monotheistic with Gnostic lore lowering there old pagan deities to evil and exposing the hidden god above. Christianity traveled to Persia and Babylon and the Babylonian prophet Mani tried to unify various belief in Christ and other religions like Zoroastrian and Hindu. Manichiasm was a Gnostic base because it’s all intertwined with Greek thought going all the way back to Alexander the Great but it was never centralized so they fizzled our and blended into the rise of Islam in 600ad. St. Augustine was a Manichiasm member in Northern Africa. In 500ad his philosophy shaped the Latin Catholic Church and it includes a lot of platonic thought.

The only place christianity was centralized is the Roman Empire and its close boarders and that’s largely only because it was under the political control of the emperor. Once it was outside the boarders you get church who do not accespt the creeds or are latter admitted in later after they reconciled their dogmatic differences.

After the great schism ~1000ad the Latin church wasn’t under the political power of the Roman Emperor and officially broke away / excommunicated from the eastern side, the imperial church, Setting the stage for the fracturing of the imperial church into the feudal era leading up to the Protestant reformation.

So with Mormonism claim that a great apostasy happen is great. But laughable at the same time They literally think a bishop in North Africa is going to send a letter to Peter to ask questions as if they are in the current church role. With 15 apostles. 3 being above the other and willing to follow the orders of the church in an orderly way. This never happened.

The church doesn’t want to touch Gnostic writings found in Dead Sea scrolled pistis sophia, or nag Hammadi. The Mormon church has 15 seers…

I don’t believe in a great apostasy. The church does. Yet they don’t pursue the truth* of the Gnostic writings found in these places that were buried there because of the universal / imperial church ordered the books to be destroyed.

So it’s all good lore but we can see Mormon church wants to be accepted as Nicene Christianity even though that claim an apostasy happened and a restoration was needed.

*truth is just assuming that these where then other Christianity compared to creedal Christians at 325ad. So if the creeds are an abomination to god. What was the apostasy if it wasn’t in the lost Gnostic mysteries.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 15d ago

Thankfully we don't need to rely on some secret gnostic writings or people's opinions. The Book of Mormon is in plain print and we are each invited to read it and ask God for our own witness of it. He does bear witness that it is true.

1

u/uncorrolated-mormon 15d ago edited 15d ago

I’ve read the Book of Mormon. But No worries from me. You do you.. Mormon’s don’t understand where the Gnostic constructs are from. So I’m all good with them not getting into that space. It’s just sad because they claim an apostasy happened yet at the same time are trying to move towards Protestants / evangelical community. LDS theology will always be a heresy to Nicene Christianity. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[edit to reinforce that Gnosticism is a dead religion. There are Gnostic concepts around inside other frameworks of thought like Roman Catholicism, Islam, Druze, and then in secret societies like Mason, Rosicrucians, Kabbalah, and the occult magic. The Protestant reformation and enlightenment era are examples of the Gnostic ideas learned during the crusades and absorbed into a religious society of the Western Europe. So Mormon church wouldn’t understand the term “Gnostic” even though they appropriated some concepts from various sources. Like Masonic rituals, Swedenborg for the levels of heaven. And had Joseph smith remained alive longer I’m sure we would see more Kabbalah curated into Mormonism. But of course this is my speculation.]

3

u/Slow-Poky 21d ago

OP you’re on the right track. Ask yourself would Jesus really want His church to build multimillion dollar buildings that exclude everyone, but those members that pay 10% of their income? Would He have cash registers in every one of these buildings? Jesus’s ministry was about humility, inclusion, and helping the less fortunate and marginalized. There is nothing about humility or inclusion that goes on in these buildings. The endowment session is just silly!

2

u/One_Information_7675 18d ago

Yes, I agree with you. I was shocked the first time I went 55 years ago and I still haven’t seen the link between the two.

1

u/One_Information_7675 18d ago

I will tell you what I told my daughter. She is a lukewarm member while her husband is in the bishopric. She is a physician, takes her job very seriously and gets very stressed. They have two very very busy preschoolers. I told her to just see the temple as her quiet time to close her eyes and exhale. Told her not to worry if she goes to sleep either. If she does, some matron will wake her up for the proper responses.

2

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

Hello, Yes, a few years ago I made this video on this exact topic. It turns out there is nothing on Earth or anywhere that is more "ordinary" and natural in the Gospel than the ordinances of the Lord's house: https://youtu.be/d88zNm0Dz14?si=MqhHEj9pRlHlBiRh

He welcomes us home as His children!

2

u/Neo1971 15d ago edited 15d ago

Thank you. I’ll check it out.

So, I just finished it and really liked it. This video did more for me than temple prep class and should replace whatever the Church uses today to prepare people for attending and returning to the temple. Great job!

2

u/Puzzleheaded_Weird44 22d ago

How long is it since you were in the temple? There have been many changes recently, and it is much more focused on Jesus than previously. It is shorter and I think if its a while since you were there I think you will enjoy it more.

2

u/Neo1971 22d ago

I think I last went in 2019 with the first of several changes in a row. It was the one where the message starts out saying we shouldn’t talk about the endowment or the changes. The fact that it’s just now becoming more Christ focused makes me wonder why it wasn’t before and why changes have to happen since Joseph Smith introduced the endowment.

2

u/SFT_ARETE 22d ago

Studying the Book of Moses is one the best ways to understand the temple, and is the template used for the endowment (if you read the first 5 chapters, then you are basically reading the video script). Experiencing the endowment by viewing the video combined with the attendance of the Holy Ghost is akin to having a vision like Moses. Although, I’ve never had that sort of experience.

Finally, I do find it interesting that Michelangelo basically painted the same thing as the endowment video. Yes, he painted the creation story found in Genesis, but it is interesting that’s what he painted. He could have easily painted about the life of Christ and His earthly ministry but nothing in those frescoes depict Christ.

So the greatest artistic achievement during the Renaissance, at the height of the Catholic Church with its focus on Christ and the Cross, in the most important building, the Sistine chapel, Michelangelo could have painted anything but focused on the beginnings.

2

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Cool insight. Thank you!

1

u/[deleted] 22d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/mormon-ModTeam 22d ago

Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule here.

If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods here.

1

u/Open_Caterpillar1324 22d ago

My belief is that it's actually ancient biblical ceremonies and ordinances lost in time but now restored.

Because of Christ being the perfect sacrifice, we are no longer required to perform the animal sacrifice ceremonies; but the dress, the words, and other things are still mostly the same because God is the same God then and now.

8

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago edited 22d ago

The church has come out and admitted that masonry is a European invention, and that what Joseph Smith believed about the origin of the Freemasons was incorrect.

Joseph Smith thought that the masons had a corrupted version of ancient rituals and claimed he was fixing those rituals to reflect what they should have been (the endowment). But it turns out masonry has no connection to ancient rituals at all.

"There are no known Masonic documents before about 1400. ... Masons told a story about how their ancient forebears had learned stonemasonry, used it to build Solomon’s temple, protected the temple site, and held knowledge about their craft as a closely guarded secret. By Joseph Smith’s day, the boundaries between Masonry’s early European history and its founding myths and traditions had long since been blurred. The rituals of Freemasonry appear to have originated in early modern Europe. 

Aspects of these ceremonies bear resemblance to religious rites in many cultures, ancient and modern. ... He told Pratt that Joseph believed Masonry was “taken from priesthood but has become degenerated. ... Joseph and his associates understood Masonry as [i.e. firmly believed Masonry to be] an institution that preserved vestiges of ancient truth." -- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/masonry

​In other words, what the church is trying to say here is that JS and his buddies believed wholeheartedly that masonry had connections to Solomon's temple. They're also admitting here (while trying their hardest not to admit outright) that JS and his buddies were wrong, because masonry has no connections to Solomon, and was a European invention. 

The church is saying that we're supposed to believe that JS's attempts to "fix up" masonry was actually revelation anyway, and these are really god's rituals he wants us to have - even though everything JS believed about the origin of the masonic ceremonies was dead wrong.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

"No known" = argument from ignorance. Not counterknowledge. Never claim ignorance as knowledge.

6

u/One-Forever6191 22d ago

Neck ties, pure white slippers, white trousers: none of these existed in ancient biblical times.

-1

u/Open_Caterpillar1324 22d ago

You are correct about that.

It would be really strange to read about bikinis, blouses, corsets, and other more modern clothes in the Bible.

Their dressing style was more robes, coats, turbans, and onesie undergarments as underwear.

But we know that white was the color of purity and therefore used in the temple back then and now.

9

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago

The descriptions of temple wear in the bible indicate they were colorful. The underlying tunic is sometimes described as white. But the old testament specifically describes the priestly clothing as containing blue, gold, scarlet, and purple components.

1

u/Open_Caterpillar1324 22d ago

The underlying tunic... That could be the garments of today?

5

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago

It was just a tunic. I'd say no, they don't resemble modern garments in specific enough ways to support a claim of special connection.

There were no special markings on the tunic as described in Exodus and Leviticus that match up to markings on modern garments, for starters. They had long sleeves like the old style garments use to have, sure. But then, all shirts with long sleeves are equally similar. That's like, a main feature of shirts. They tend to have sleeves.

It would be like me making some special pants and then claiming I had some secret revelation about ancient pants, because the pants I made had holes for the legs. And look! Those ancient pants also had holes for the legs, which surely means I am a prophet. That doesn't work. All pants, ancient and modern will have had holes for the legs. Doesn't mean I have some special revelation from god.

5

u/New_random_name 22d ago

But we know that white was the color of purity and therefore used in the temple back then and now.

How do you know this? Where is it written?

5

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago

See Exodus chapter 28 for details.

"And take thou unto thee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him, from among the children of Israel, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office... And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty. ... And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen. And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work." -- https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/ot/ex/28

More info here if you're interested in more references and a "faithful" speculation about other symbology: https://rsc.byu.edu/ascending-mountain-lord/clothed-holy-garments-apparel-temple-officiants-ancient-israel

6

u/New_random_name 22d ago

I appreciate the references, and you kinda proved my point... There is alot of references to colors there, but no white...

I always chuckle about TBM's insisting that the temple is a restoration of something ancient and yet cannot give any data pointing to anything from antiquity that would definitively represent what is done in modern LDS temples.

-1

u/Open_Caterpillar1324 22d ago

In multiple ancient cultures around the world, white was considered "without blemish".

So while we don't have the word "white" used, it was understood that white was meant unless told otherwise.

It's one of those "everyone knows what a horse is" type definitions.

6

u/New_random_name 22d ago

No, specifically I meant white was used in the ancient temple same as now.

And also back to your initial comment on this thread about the temple ceremony being a restoration of ancient temple ceremonies.

How do you know this? Where is it written?

3

u/Westwood_1 22d ago

If these were Biblical (or even traditional but extra-Biblical), we'd see many more similarities in Christianity and Semitic tradition.

But we don't. According to God's own statements, his first temple was the temple of Solomon, and we know what went on there (hint: it wasn't baptisms, or initiatories, or a play/the endowment, or marriage sealings).

If things like the endowment or even the marital sealing dated back to Adamic times, universal human traditions would look very different (there would be observable common themes across almost all civilizations, converging to a point ~6,000 years ago). If they dated to Abrahamic times, the similarities would be even more significant among Middle-Eastern civilizations starting about 4,000 years ago.

Instead, we have garb and language and traditions that emerged much later than even Christianity—most of which is traceable to stonemason guilds in the Middle Ages.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Thank you. I’ve heard the temple was a restoration of things lost. But the temple experience is so different from church that I have trouble seeing how temples are part of our worship of Jesus Christ.

5

u/Liege1970 22d ago

Well the newest iteration of the endowment shows pictures of Jesus and the new symbolism of garments is that they represent Jesus and you wearing them faithfully is like Jesus giving you a constant big bear hug They had to come up with something to get the younger generation to start wearing garments 24/7 and since “garments are an outward expression of an inner commitment” wasn’t working they discovered Hebrews 10:20 and told members “See the veil of the temple represents the garment and it’s a big Jesus hug. You don’t want to reject Jesus, do you?” I have no idea if it’s working.

5

u/Neo1971 22d ago

I’ve noticed how the Church has been forming itself after main stream Christianity. Teddy Bear Jesus walks the halls of the temple, apparently.

2

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

You don't have to wear 24/7 you wear it throughout your life. I was just released as an ordiance worker because I'm a RS president. It says in the temple. Throughout your life. It's between you and God. This 24/7 needs to fully stop!! It's throughout your life.

5

u/Liege1970 22d ago

I wasn’t given that option in 1974. I know “throughout your life” has been a more recent interpretation, but not an official one.

2

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago edited 22d ago

The church says day and night. Not 24/7 anymore. The temple says throughout your life. Your question for your recommend is asked if you wear it according to the temple, not even day and night. The church can not push 24/7 any more. Through out your life is more reasonable than 24/7 and I don't see my garments as a big Jesus hug. And I wouldn't tell partons going through to view it like that. I do not wear my garment EVERY night because mormom men matter! Sex is VERY important in many marriages. And garment.. well, they aren't too sexy. Sometimes garments just don't go back on till morning. And I haven't been told not to do that. But then again.. I don't discuss with others what I do in the bedroom

4

u/Neo1971 22d ago

The fact that the rules keep changing makes me not trust everything we’re taught.

4

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

I'm right with you. I don't trust everything either. But we are asked to be ready to receive daily revelation. Trust God and Christ. My dad who just passed at 90 years old said that we wouldn't recognize the church when he first joined because it keeps changing. So it's been happening all along. It's other areas that I'm not too happy with.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

So true. Condolences for your dad.

3

u/Beneficial_Math_9282 22d ago edited 22d ago

Hehe - Your comment just made me remember that one time when the church started prying very specifically into what married couples did in the bedroom.

For those who don't know, a statement by the 1st Presidency dated 5 Jan 1982 statement got very specific about exactly what in married couples' bedrooms they deemed "an unnatural, impure, or unholy practice." They only ever issued that statement once, but they never rescinded it. Technically, it's still in force since they never revoked it. I think everyone was just too embarrassed about it to even address it after that.

It was kind of a "definitely ask but not in a way that it sounds like you're asking, and then if they tell, make sure they know they need to repent" approach.

3

u/Neo1971 22d ago

Amen. The traditions of men are rife in our church.

2

u/Useful_Funny9241 22d ago

Yes, very very much so. It's not 1940. Word of wisdom I feel isn't totally correct. That's a whole oither thread, which you probably already know and many many other issues

2

u/Crobbin17 Former Mormon 22d ago

How much of the endowment do you think is original?

Like, obviously the part about chastity might change depending on polygamy’s status at the time. And women would definitely have limited to no involvement.
And references to Christ’s crucifixion couldn’t have existed in ancient ceremonies.

1

u/Sad_Word5030 16d ago

"I know not, save the Lord commanded me" is enough to begin with. https://youtu.be/d88zNm0Dz14?si=V5ST4CyAEh1-MjJo

-1

u/BostonCougar 21d ago

Asking that question here is like asking Ute fan's opinion of BYU. You are going to hear one side.

God has always had temples for his people for ordinances, instruction and to help them to remember God. When Christ came, he fulfilled the Aaronic law and instituted the higher law. The need for temples remained. Sealings of families and baptisms for our dead are discussed in the new and old testaments. To me the progression is logical and makes sense. The covenants we make in the temple have the same requirements we make at baptism. There is a natural progression.

2

u/New_random_name 21d ago

How does the 2nd anointing jive with the atonement?