Array

Relationship between the temple endowment and Freemasonry: Difference between revisions
Line 91: Line 91:
===Timing of the Endowment revelations===
===Timing of the Endowment revelations===


Critics have argued that Joseph's induction into Masonry (15-16 March 1842) predates Joseph's introduction of the full endowment (4 May 1842). Thus, they claim that Masonry was a necessary element for Joseph's "revelation."
Critics have noted that Joseph's initiation into Freemasonry (15-16 March 1842) predates his introduction of the full temple endowment among the Saints (4 May 1842). They thus claim that Masonry was a necessary element for Joseph's self-generated "revelation" of the Nauvoo-era temple ceremonies.  


Wrote Matthew Brown of this claim:
But one LDS author draws attention to the fact that there is much more to the history of the endowment restoration than critics of the Church are willing to admit.


:Plenty of evidence...is available that Joseph Smith had a detailed knowledge of the Nauvoo temple ceremonies long before he introduced them in May 1842 and long before he set foot inside a Masonic hall...While Joseph Smith was translating the book of Abraham from Egyptian papyri, he wrote a series of short explanations for three of the illustrations that accompanied his translation. The Prophet noted that in Facsimile 2, figures 3 and 7 were related in some manner to "the grand Key-words of the Holy Priesthood" and "the sign of the Holy Ghost." When he came to figure 8, he explained that this area on the Egyptian drawing contained "writings that cannot be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God."...
:Plenty of evidence...is available that Joseph Smith had a detailed knowledge of the Nauvoo temple ceremonies long before he introduced them in May 1842 and long before he set foot inside a Masonic hall...While Joseph Smith was translating the book of Abraham from Egyptian papyri, he wrote a series of short explanations for three of the illustrations that accompanied his translation. The Prophet noted that in Facsimile 2, figures 3 and 7 were related in some manner to "the grand Key-words of the Holy Priesthood" and "the sign of the Holy Ghost." When he came to figure 8, he explained that this area on the Egyptian drawing contained "writings that cannot be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God."...


:Other writers have used the Facsimile 2 material to sharpen the chronological argument against Joseph Smith. Facsimile 2 and its temple-related explanations were first printed in the 15 March 1842 edition of the Times and Seasons, the same day that the Prophet received the first of three Masonic initiation rites. Latter-day Saints have traditionally argued that this issue of the newspaper was published during the day while the Prophet's Masonic initiation did not occur until that evening. Thus Joseph Smith must have had temple knowledge before he had Masonic knowledge. But critics point out that the 15 March issue of the paper was not actually published until 19 March, several days after the Prophet witnessed the Masonic ceremonies.
:Other writers have used the Facsimile 2 material to sharpen the chronological argument against Joseph Smith. Facsimile 2 and its temple-related explanations were first printed in the 15 March 1842 edition of the ''Times and Seasons'', the same day that the Prophet received the first of three Masonic initiation rites. Latter-day Saints have traditionally argued that this issue of the newspaper was published during the day while the Prophet's Masonic initiation did not occur until that evening. Thus Joseph Smith must have had temple knowledge before he had Masonic knowledge. But critics point out that the 15 March issue of the paper was not actually published until 19 March, several days after the Prophet witnessed the Masonic ceremonies.


:This is where terminology becomes crucial. Critics claim that the phrases employed by Joseph Smith in the Facsimile 2 explanations are Masonic and that it was not until several days after his Masonic induction that Joseph Smith "first spoke of 'certain key words and signs belonging to the priesthood.'" These critics assume the terms are necessarily "Masonic," yet it must be remembered that Freemasonry's rites are little more than borrowed baggage. Then what about the supposedly incriminating timing of these incidents? This is precisely the point at which the entire argument falls apart. On 5 May 1841 William Appleby paid a visit to Joseph Smith, who read to him the revelation on temple ordinances, now identified as Doctrine and Covenants 124, that was received 19 January 1841. After the two men discussed baptism for the dead, the Prophet got out his collection of Egyptian papyrus scrolls and, while exhibiting Facsimile 2, explained to Appleby that part of the drawing was related to "the Lord revealing the Grand key words of the Holy Priesthood, to Adam in the garden of Eden, as also to Seth, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, and to all whom the Priesthood was revealed."
:This is where terminology becomes crucial. Critics claim that the phrases employed by Joseph Smith in the Facsimile 2 explanations are Masonic and that it was not until several days after his Masonic induction that Joseph Smith "first spoke of 'certain key words and signs belonging to the priesthood.'" These critics assume the terms are necessarily "Masonic," yet it must be remembered that Freemasonry's rites are little more than borrowed baggage. Then what about the supposedly incriminating timing of these incidents? This is precisely the point at which the entire argument falls apart. On 5 May 1841 William Appleby paid a visit to Joseph Smith, who read to him the revelation on temple ordinances, now identified as Doctrine and Covenants 124, that was received 19 January 1841. After the two men discussed baptism for the dead, the Prophet got out his collection of Egyptian papyrus scrolls and, while exhibiting Facsimile 2, explained to Appleby that part of the drawing was related to "the Lord revealing the Grand key words of the Holy Priesthood, to Adam in the garden of Eden, as also to Seth, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, and to all whom the Priesthood was revealed."
Line 103: Line 103:
:It is also clear from Doctrine and Covenants 124 that Joseph Smith was well aware of the main ritual elements of the Nauvoo endowment ceremony at least as early as 19 January 1841. [See {{s||DC||124||}}.){{ref|brown3}}
:It is also clear from Doctrine and Covenants 124 that Joseph Smith was well aware of the main ritual elements of the Nauvoo endowment ceremony at least as early as 19 January 1841. [See {{s||DC||124||}}.){{ref|brown3}}


The note from Appleby is dated from a contemporaneous journal of 5 May 1841, ten days before Joseph's initiation as a Mason.{{ref|appleby1}}
The note from Appleby is found in his journal under the date of 5 May 1841, a little less than a year before Joseph's initiation into the Masonic Lodge at Nauvoo.{{ref|appleby1}}


And, upon his initiation, Joseph was already explaining things which the Masons themselves did not understand, according to one witness:
And, upon his initiation, Joseph was already explaining things which the Masons themselves did not understand, according to one witness:

Revision as of 19:11, 23 December 2006

Answers portal
Temples
    RESOURCES

General:

Endowment:

Masonry:

    PERSPECTIVES
    MEDIA
    OTHER PORTALS

Important note: Members of FAIR take their temple covenants seriously. We consider the temple teachings to be sacred, and will not discuss their specifics in a public forum.

Criticism

Critics of the LDS Church often point to similarities between the rituals of Freemasonry and the LDS temple endowment and claim that since Joseph Smith was initiated as a Freemason in Nauvoo, Illinois shortly before he introduced the full endowment to the Saints (as opposed to the partial endowment given in the Kirtland Temple), he must have incorporated elements of the Masonic rites into his own ceremony. Implicit in this charge is the idea that Joseph Smith's ritual was not revealed to him by God and thus not a legitimate restoration of ancient Israelite and early Christian ordinances.

It is worthwhile to note that these critics are also often critical of Freemasonry, and thus attempt guilt by association.

Source(s) of the Criticism

  • Scott Abbott, Review of Mormonism's Temple of Doom, by William J. Schnoebelen and James R. Spencer, Dialogue 22/2 (1989): 151–53.
  • Edward H. Ashment, "The LDS Temple Ceremony: Historical Origins and Religious Value," Dialogue 27/3 (1994): 289–98.
  • David J. Buerger, "The Development of the Mormon Temple Endowment Ceremony," Dialogue 20/4 (1987): 33–76.
  • David J. Buerger, The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship (San Francisco: Smith Research Associates, 1994).
  • Michael W. Homer, "'Similarity of Priesthood in Masonry': The Relationship between Freemasonry and Mormonism," Dialogue 27/3 (1994): 1–113.
  • Robert N. Hullinger, Joseph Smith's Response to Skepticism (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1992), 99–120.
  • Armand L. Mauss, "Culture, Charisma, and Change: Reflections on Mormon Temple Worship," Dialogue 20/4 (1987): 77–83.
  • Sterling M. McMurrin, Review of Encyclopedia of Mormonism, ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, Dialogue 26/2 (1993): 210.
  • Keith E. Norman, "A Kinder, Gentler Mormonism: Moving Beyond the Violence of Our Past," Sunstone (August 1990): 10–14.
  • Lance S. Owens, "Joseph Smith and Kabbalah: The Occult Connection," Dialogue 27/3 (1994): 166–73.
  • Gregory A. Prince, Power from on High: The Development of Mormon Priesthood (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1995), 146–48.
  • Allen D. Roberts, "Where Are the All-Seeing Eyes?" Sunstone (May/June 1979): 22–37
  • George D. Smith Jr., Review of Evolution of the Mormon Temple Ceremony: 1920–1990, by Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Sunstone (June 1991): 56.
  • George D. Smith Jr., ed., An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City: Signature Books in association with Smith Research Associates, 1991), xxxvii–xxxviii.
  • Margaret and Paul Toscano, Strangers in Paradox: Explorations in Mormon Theology (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1990), 279, 287.

Response

Symbolist F. L. Brink suggests that Joseph Smith successfully created an "innovative and intricate symbology" that suited well the psychic needs of his followers.[1]

In order to understand this issue, a few facts need to be understood:

  1. Joseph Smith, Jr. was initiated as a Freemason in Nauvoo, Illinois on the 15th and 16th of March 1842; his brother Hyrum and his father Joseph Sr. were Masons before the Church's organization in April 1830.
  2. A few of the early leaders of the Church were Masons before the Church's organization while many others were initiated into the Masonic institution after the Prophet was.
  3. Masonry was a common social institution in mid-19th century America.
  4. There are similarities between the rituals of Freemasonry and those of the LDS Temple endowment. These similarities center around
  • the use of a ritual drama—the story of Hiram Abiff is used by the Masons, while the LDS endowment uses the story of Adam and Eve and the creation (the LDS versions have parallels to ancient Israleite temple worship).
  • some similar hand actions in the course of the rituals (the LDS versions having distinct parallels to ancient Israelite temple worship and early Christian usage).

Two aspects of temple worship

In order to understand the relationship between the temple endowment and Freemasonry it is useful to consider the temple experience. In the temple, participants are confronted with ritual in a form which is unknown in LDS worship outside of that venue. The temple endowment can be viewed as being made up of two parts:

  1. The teachings of the endowment, i.e., the doctrines taught and the covenants made with God.
  2. The method of presenting the endowment, or the "ritual" mechanics themselves.

It is in the ritual presentation of the endowment teachings and covenants that the similarities between the LDS temple worship and Freemasonry are the most apparent. The question is, why would this be the case?

Joseph's challenge

In developing the endowment, some people believe that Joseph faced a problem. He wished to communicate, in a clear and effective manner, some different (and, in some cases, complex) religious ideas. These included such abstract concepts as

  • the nature of creation (matter being organized and not created out of nothing)
  • humanity's relationship to God and to each other
  • eternal marriage and exaltation in the afterlife

Joseph needed to communicate these ideas to a diverse population; some with limited educational attainments, many of whom were immigrants; several with only modest understanding of the English language; all of whom possessed different levels of intellectual and spiritual maturity - but who needed to be instructed through the same ceremony.

Joseph Smith's very brief experience with Freemasonry before the introduction of the full LDS endowment—including personal service as the Chaplain of Rising Sun Lodge in Nauvoo—may have reminded him of the power of instruction through ritual and repetition. Some people believe that Joseph may have seized upon these tools as teaching devices for the endowment's doctrines and covenants during the Nauvoo era. Other people are of the opinion that since these elements were previously present in the worship of the Kirtland Temple they were not 'borrowed' by the Prophet at all.

Regardless, the use of symbols was characteristic of Joseph Smith's era; it was not unique to him or Masonry:

Symbols on buildings, in literature, stamped on manufactured goods, etc. were not endemic to Mormons and Masons but were common throughout all of mid-nineteenth century American society (as even a cursory inspection of books, posters, buildings and photos of the periods will bear out.) So, assuming [Joseph] Smith felt a need to communicate specific principles to his Saints, he might naturally develop a set of easily understood symbols as were already in familiar use about him.[2]

Confidentiality

The LDS temple ceremony was, and is, considered sacred. As such, it was not to be exposed to the view or discussion of outsiders.

Joseph Smith was of the view that many of the Saints were not good at keeping religious confidences:

The reason we do not have the secrets of the Lord revealed unto us, is because we do not keep them but reveal them; we do not keep our own secrets, but reveal our difficulties to the world, even to our enemies, then how would we keep the secrets of the Lord? I can keep a secret till Doomsday.[3]

A few of the early leaders of the Church pointed out that one of the aims of Masonry was to teach adherents proper respect for promises of confidentiality.[4] For instance,

  • Joseph Smith: "The secret of Masonry is to keep a secret."[5]
  • Brigham Young: "The main part of Masonry is to keep a secret."[6]

This institutionalized Masonic principle was a trait that would be necessary for the Saints to incorporate into their lives once they were endowed, because certain elements of the temple ritual were considered to be very sacred and were not to be divulged to the uninitiated. This may be the key for understanding why the Prophet encouraged so many of the Nauvoo-era Saints to join the Masonic brotherhood.

Early Saints' Views

The Saints of Joseph Smith's era accepted the then-common belief that Masonry ultimately sprang from Solomon's temple. Thus, Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball understood Masonry to be a corrupted form of a pristine ancient temple rite.[7] One author later wrote that masonry as an "institution dates its origins many centuries back, it is only a perverted Priesthood stolen from the Temples of the Most High."[8]

Joseph Fielding wrote during the Nauvoo period:

Many have joined the Masonic institution. This seems to have been a stepping stone or preparation for something else, the true origin of Masonry. This I have also seen and rejoice in it.... I have evidence enough that Joseph is not fallen. I have seen him after giving, as I before said, the origin of Masonry.[9]

Heber C. Kimball wrote of the endowment:

We have received some precious things through the Prophet on the Priesthood which would cause your soul to rejoice. I cannot give them to you on paper for they are not to be written so you must come and get them for yourself...There is a similarity of Priesthood in Masonry. Brother Joseph says Masonry was taken from Priesthood but has become degenerated. But many things are perfect.[10]

Thus, to Joseph's contemporaries, there was much more to the LDS temple endowment than just warmed-over Freemasonry. None of Joseph's friends complained that he had just adapted Masonic ritual for his own purposes. Rather, they were aware of the common ritual elements, but understood that Joseph had restored something that was both ritually and theologically ancient and God-given.

Timing of the Endowment revelations

Critics have noted that Joseph's initiation into Freemasonry (15-16 March 1842) predates his introduction of the full temple endowment among the Saints (4 May 1842). They thus claim that Masonry was a necessary element for Joseph's self-generated "revelation" of the Nauvoo-era temple ceremonies.

But one LDS author draws attention to the fact that there is much more to the history of the endowment restoration than critics of the Church are willing to admit.

Plenty of evidence...is available that Joseph Smith had a detailed knowledge of the Nauvoo temple ceremonies long before he introduced them in May 1842 and long before he set foot inside a Masonic hall...While Joseph Smith was translating the book of Abraham from Egyptian papyri, he wrote a series of short explanations for three of the illustrations that accompanied his translation. The Prophet noted that in Facsimile 2, figures 3 and 7 were related in some manner to "the grand Key-words of the Holy Priesthood" and "the sign of the Holy Ghost." When he came to figure 8, he explained that this area on the Egyptian drawing contained "writings that cannot be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God."...
Other writers have used the Facsimile 2 material to sharpen the chronological argument against Joseph Smith. Facsimile 2 and its temple-related explanations were first printed in the 15 March 1842 edition of the Times and Seasons, the same day that the Prophet received the first of three Masonic initiation rites. Latter-day Saints have traditionally argued that this issue of the newspaper was published during the day while the Prophet's Masonic initiation did not occur until that evening. Thus Joseph Smith must have had temple knowledge before he had Masonic knowledge. But critics point out that the 15 March issue of the paper was not actually published until 19 March, several days after the Prophet witnessed the Masonic ceremonies.
This is where terminology becomes crucial. Critics claim that the phrases employed by Joseph Smith in the Facsimile 2 explanations are Masonic and that it was not until several days after his Masonic induction that Joseph Smith "first spoke of 'certain key words and signs belonging to the priesthood.'" These critics assume the terms are necessarily "Masonic," yet it must be remembered that Freemasonry's rites are little more than borrowed baggage. Then what about the supposedly incriminating timing of these incidents? This is precisely the point at which the entire argument falls apart. On 5 May 1841 William Appleby paid a visit to Joseph Smith, who read to him the revelation on temple ordinances, now identified as Doctrine and Covenants 124, that was received 19 January 1841. After the two men discussed baptism for the dead, the Prophet got out his collection of Egyptian papyrus scrolls and, while exhibiting Facsimile 2, explained to Appleby that part of the drawing was related to "the Lord revealing the Grand key words of the Holy Priesthood, to Adam in the garden of Eden, as also to Seth, Noah, Melchizedek, Abraham, and to all whom the Priesthood was revealed."
It is also clear from Doctrine and Covenants 124 that Joseph Smith was well aware of the main ritual elements of the Nauvoo endowment ceremony at least as early as 19 January 1841. [See DC ꞉124.)[11]

The note from Appleby is found in his journal under the date of 5 May 1841, a little less than a year before Joseph's initiation into the Masonic Lodge at Nauvoo.[12]

And, upon his initiation, Joseph was already explaining things which the Masons themselves did not understand, according to one witness:

the Prophet explained many things about the rites that even Masons do not pretend to understand but which he made most clear and beautiful.[13]

Differences

It is also worth noting that many of the similarities highlighted by church critics are only superficial. For example, critics focus on the common use of architectural elements on the Salt Lake Temple and in Masonry, even though the endowment makes no references to such elements. In almost every case, shared symbolic forms have different meanings.

The goals of Masonry and the endowment are not the same. Both teach important truths, but the truths they teach are different. Masonry teaches of man's relationship to his fellow men and offers no means of salvation; it is not a religion. The temple endowment teaches of man's relationship to God, and Latter-day Saints consider it essential for exaltation.

Modifications

With time, modern Saints have lost their connection to the institution of Freemasonry. Therefore, the understanding of these ritual forms has been lost by most members. As members no longer require or respond to such rituals elements, some have been modified or removed from the temple's ritual. The ritual of the temple has undergone (and will likely continue to undergo) modification and improvement to meet the needs of the Saints in the coming years.

Conclusion

The temple endowment is made up of two elements:

  1. the "endowment proper," or doctrines taught and covenants made—these elements were revealed to Joseph Smith well before his induction into Masonry; and
  2. the ritual method for the presentation of the endowment.

While the ritual has elements that are shared with Freemasonry, the presentation is not the endowment. Joseph used these ritual elements because of the Saints' familiarity with them. Ritual drama provided a teaching tool which permitted the prophet to communicate the endowment to a population of limited education:

Although Joseph Smith freely admitted relating Masonry and Mormonism, to assert that Joseph's Mormonism was simply the direct product of borrowed Masonry is too naive and incomplete a conclusion by itself. Joseph's Masonry was not a conventional one. He attempted to restore it in much the same way the gospel was restored. That is, he saw Masonry, like Christendom, as possessing some important truths which could be beneficially extracted from what was otherwise an apostate institution. Mormons, with the restored priesthood, had the "true Masonry,' even 'Celestial Masonry." Joseph claimed to have received some of the "lost keys" which would permit him to purify Masonry and return it to its state of ancient perfection. His free use of Masonic symbols, then, reflects Smith's feeling that he had a legitimate right to employ these divine emblems of antiquity.[14]

The presentation of the endowment has been (and likely will continue to be) changed under priesthood direction to meet the changing needs of Latter-day Saints around the world. Many of the Masonic elements once found in the presentation of the endowment are no longer in use. Symbolic elements in the endowment, whatever their source, are present only to aid members in a religious purpose: understanding doctrine and keeping covenants.

We live in a world of symbols. No man or woman can come out of the temple endowed as he should be, unless he has seen, beyond the symbol, the mighty realities for which the symbols stand.[15]

Endnotes

  1. T. L. Brink, "The Rise of Mormonism: A Case Study in the Symbology of Frontier America," International Journal of Symbology, Vol. 6, No. 3, 1975, p. 4.
  2. [note]  Allen D. Roberts, "Where are the All-Seeing Eyes?," Sunstone 4 no. (Issue #3 (Issue #15)) (May 1979), 26. (Issue #15) off-site off-site
  3. [note] Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 194–195, (19 December 1841). off-site Direct off-site; see also History of the Church, 4:478–479. Volume 4 link
  4. [note]  See footnote 20 of Matthew B. Brown, "Of Your Own Selves Shall Men Arise, Review of The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship by David John Buerger," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): 97–131. off-site
  5. [note] Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 329. off-site{15 October 1843)
  6. [note] Wilford Woodruff, Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, 9 vols., ed., Scott G. Kenny (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1985), 5:418, (22 January 1860, spelling standardized). ISBN 0941214133.
  7. [note]  See Footnote 30, Matthew B. Brown, "Of Your Own Selves Shall Men Arise, Review of The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship by David John Buerger," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): 97–131. off-site
  8. [note]  H. Belnap, "A Mysterious Preacher," The Instructor 21 no. ? (15 March 1886), 91.; cited in Matthew B. Brown, "Of Your Own Selves Shall Men Arise, Review of The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship by David John Buerger," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): 97–131. off-site
  9. [note]  Andrew F. Ehat, "'They Might Have Known That He Was Not a Fallen Prophet'—The Nauvoo Journal of Joseph Fielding," Brigham Young University Studies 19 no. 2 (1979), 145, 147, spelling and punctuation standardized.
  10. [note]  Heber C. Kimball to Parley P. Pratt, 17 June 1842, Parley P. Pratt Papers, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah, spelling and punctuation standardized.
  11. [note]  Matthew B. Brown, "Of Your Own Selves Shall Men Arise, Review of The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship by David John Buerger," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): 97–131. off-site (citations omitted)
  12. [note]  William I. Appleby Journal, 5 May 1841, MS 1401 1, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City, Utah.
  13. [note]  Horace H. Cummings, "True Stories from My Journal," The Instructor 64 no. 8 (August 1929), 441.; cited in Matthew B. Brown, "Of Your Own Selves Shall Men Arise, Review of The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship by David John Buerger," FARMS Review of Books 10/1 (1998): 97–131. off-site
  14. [note]  Allen D. Roberts, "Where are the All-Seeing Eyes?," Sunstone 4 no. (Issue #3(Issue #15)) (May 1979), 25. #15) off-site off-site
  15. [note]  John A. Widtsoe, "Temple Worship," Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine (April 1921): 62 (italics added).

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

Template:MasonryWiki

Relationship between the temple endowment and Freemasonry

Temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are sacred places where Church members participate in sacred ceremonies (ordinances) that help them come closer to God and prepare to live forever in an eternal family.

To view articles about Latter-day Saint temples, click "Expand" in the blue bar:

Articles about Latter-day Saint temples
Baptism for the dead
The temple endowment
Temple sealings
Other topics


Videos below from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Load video
YouTube


Load video
YouTube


FAIR web site

Template:MasonryFAIR

FAIR temple articles

External links

Template:MasonryLinks Template:TempleLinks

Printed material

Template:MasonryPrint

Temple printed materials
  • Matthew B. Brown,The Gate of Heaven: Insight on the Doctrines and Symbols of the Temple (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 1999), 1.
  • Matthew B. Brown, Symbols in Stone: Symbolism on the Early Temples of the Restoration, 2d ed., (American Fork, UT: Covenant, 1997).
  • William J. Hamblin and David Seely, Solomon's Temple: Myth and History (London: Thames and Hudson, 2007), Chapter 3.
  • Hugh W. Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment, 2nd edition, (Vol. 16 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by John Gee and Michael D. Rhodes, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2005), 1. ISBN 159038539X. 1st edition GL direct link
  • Temple and Cosmos: Beyond This Ignorant Present (Vol. 12 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by Don E. Norton, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1992), 1.
  • Boyd K. Packer, The Holy Temple (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1980), 1. ISBN 0884944115.
Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=Relationship_between_the_temple_endowment_and_Freemasonry&oldid=9277"