FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Array
User:InProgress/Website reviews/TM: Difference between revisions
(: mod) |
(: rm) |
||
| Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
|link=Mormonism and temples/Endowment/Oath of vengeance | |link=Mormonism and temples/Endowment/Oath of vengeance | ||
|subject=Oath of vengeance | |subject=Oath of vengeance | ||
|summary=In nearly every | |summary=In nearly every discussion of the temple, critics raise the issue of the "oath of vengeance" that existed during the 19th century and very early 20th century. These critics often misstate the nature of the oath and try to use its presence in the early temple endowment as evidence that the LDS temple ceremonies are ungodly, violent, and immoral. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 19:23, 14 May 2012
A FAIR Analysis of: MormonThink A work by author: Anonymous
|
A FAIR Analysis of MormonThink page "The Temple"
FAIRMORMON'S VIEW OF THE CRITICS' CONCLUSIONS
The positions that the MormonThink article "The Temple" appears to take are the following:
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
WEBSITE EDITOR COMMENT:
Due to the sacred nature of the temple ceremony, we initially tried to be sensitive and not use any specific references to temple ordinances. However, we found it impossible to really discuss the issues that trouble many Latter-day Saints without being somewhat open and specific about the activities in the temple. It shouldn't come to anyone's surprise that the complete, accurate temple ceremony is available many places on the Internet with just a click of the mouse, so there really isn't anything new revealed on this website that can't be found in many other websites and books. However we give our own opinions in response to the critic's arguments as well as true-believing member responses.
FairMormon commentary
- If any reader still thinks that MormonThink is run by active members of the Church, this statement ought to disabuse them of that notion. They are basically saying "Despite our commitment to keep the temple ordinances sacred, everyone else talks about them, so we might as well talk about them anyway."
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The temple ceremony appears to be copied from the Masons.
Heber C. Kimball, a Mason himself said, "We have the true Masonry. The Masonry of today is received from the apostasy which took place in the days of Solomon, and David. They have now and then a thing that is correct, but we have the real thing."
Author's source(s)
- Manuscript History of Brigham Young, 13 November, 1858, 1085, LDS archives; see also Stanley B. Kimball, "Heber C. Kimball and Family, The Nauvoo Years, BrighamYoung University Studies 15 (Summer 1975): 458. See also David John Buerger, The Mysteries of Godliness: A History of Mormon Temple Worship, Smith Research Associates, San Francisco, 1994, 56.)
FairMormon commentary
Additional information
- Temple ordinances: revealed—Critics claim that the LDS temple ordinances were either made up by Joseph Smith or borrowed, by him, from an earthly source. This collection of quotes has been divided into two sections. The first section consists of statements from the LDS Church's official website indicating that the temple ordinances were 'revealed' by the Lord and 'restored' from antiquity. The second section consists of statements from scripture and the General Authorities of the LDS Church. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
A detailed comparison between the endowment and Masonry shows beyond any doubt a strong connection between Masonry and the LDS temple ceremony....Joseph's introduction of the endowment ceremony came two months after he had been initiated into Freemasonry.
FairMormon commentary
- Joseph's initiation into Freemasonry (15–16 March 1842) predates his introduction of the full temple endowment among the Saints (4 May 1842), however, there is evidence that Joseph was discussing elements of the endowment in early 1841. The source of this information is Book of Abraham Facsimile 2, for which Joseph explained that 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." Joseph's explanation of Figure 8 was that it contained "writings that cannot be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God."
Quotes to consider
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.)[1]
Additional information
- Temple endowment and Freemasonry—Some critics of Mormonism see similarities between the rites of Freemasonry and LDS temple ceremonies and assume that since Joseph Smith was initiated as a Freemason shortly before he introduced the Nauvoo-style endowment he must have plagiarized elements of the Masonic rituals. This viewpoint leads them, in turn, to conclude that the LDS endowment is nothing but a variant form of Masonic initiation and therefore not from a divine source. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
We were somewhat startled to find that FAIR admits that Masonry does not date back to Bible Times. They openly state that the Masonry Rituals that resemble the LDS Temple Ceremony date from the 1700s and definitely were not used in Solomon's temple.
FairMormon commentary
- The author claims that believers "admitted" something —Critics claim that apologists only "admit" facts, while critics "disclose the truth."
Why is this startling? FAIR deals with the facts that exist. What other way is there to state something other than "openly?" - Joseph Smith claimed direct revelation from God regarding the Nauvoo-era endowment,
- Joseph Smith knew a great deal about the Nauvoo-era endowment ceremony long before the Nauvoo period - and thus long before his entry into the Masonic fraternity.
- The Nauvoo-era temple endowment ceremony has numerous exacting parallels to the initiation ceremonies of ancient Israelite and early Christian kings and priests—parallels which cannot be found among Freemasons.
Additional information
- Temple endowment and Freemasonry—Some critics of Mormonism see similarities between the rites of Freemasonry and LDS temple ceremonies and assume that since Joseph Smith was initiated as a Freemason shortly before he introduced the Nauvoo-style endowment he must have plagiarized elements of the Masonic rituals. This viewpoint leads them, in turn, to conclude that the LDS endowment is nothing but a variant form of Masonic initiation and therefore not from a divine source. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The temple ceremony coincided with plural marriage as practiced by the early saints. As Joseph did not want to let the masses know about polygamy, he may have introduced the temple ceremony as a way of keeping polygamy a secret while introducing select members into the practice of plural marriage. As an important element of the temple ceremony is to never reveal what happens in the temple, even under penalty of death (before 1990), this would help keep the polygamous marriages a secret by the people that knew about them.
FairMormon commentary
- The endowment was given to hundreds of people before the Nauvoo Temple was abandoned. Nobody has ever claimed that all of those were involved in plural marriage.
- The phrase "…an important element of the temple ceremony is to never reveal what happens in the temple…" is imprecise. An important part of the temple ceremony is to never reveal the signs and tokens revealed in the temple. That is a much smaller subset of "what happens in the temple."
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Is the temple ceremony actually secret now?
In the 1800s it was possible to keep the details of the LDS Temple Ceremony relatively secret from the vast majority of the world. However now with the Internet, there are no secrets anymore. Simply google 'Mormon Temple Ceremony' to see for yourself.
Also if signs and tokens which are needed for entrance into the celestial kingdom are meant to be secret except for loyal, temple-going Latter-day Saints, then it has failed. The Masons, former LDS and anyone that has access to the Internet knows or can easily find out the details of the signs and tokens.
FairMormon commentary
- It doesn't matter if the temple ceremony is published publicly—Latter-day Saints keep their temple covenants by not discussing it publicly. That is a commitment that they make with the Lord, not with the general public, and it makes no difference how public the information becomes.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
It is unfair to ask people to "sign a contract" that they aren't allowed to read in advance. Because the rites are secret, you have to agree to everything blindly, then discover what you've agreed to. Is this how God works?
FairMormon commentary
- The author is "speaking for God" —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to know what God ought to require.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
The original temple ceremony practiced by the saints included an oath of vengeance against the United States government for the death of Joseph Smith. The change was added by Brigham Young after Joseph was killed by the mob. This was changed in the early 1927. Imagine if Mitt Romney was running for president after taking an oath against the United States government.
FairMormon commentary
- Non-sequitur —The critic makes a statement having little or no relevance to what preceded it.
But Mitt Romney didn't take such an oath. No such oath is made in the temple today. - Until 1927 the temple endowment very likely contained such an oath. The exact wording is not entirely clear, but it appears that it did not call on the Saints themselves to take vengeance on the United States, but that they would continue to pray that God himself might avenge the blood the prophets.
- Although the Oath of Vengeance contains no curses like those in the imprecatory psalms, like the psalmists, the Saints apparently had the wisdom to take directly to God their strong feelings in response to the injustices they had been dealt. By doing so, they turned over to Him the responsibility for both justice and healing.
Additional information
- Oath of vengeance—In nearly every discussion of the temple, critics raise the issue of the "oath of vengeance" that existed during the 19th century and very early 20th century. These critics often misstate the nature of the oath and try to use its presence in the early temple endowment as evidence that the LDS temple ceremonies are ungodly, violent, and immoral. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Although we don't have the results of the survey, just by talking with members, it's apparent that many members were not comfortable with the pre-1990 ceremony. Many people described it as bizarre and didn't want to go back again.
FairMormon commentary
- Generalization —The non-believing critic attempts to speak on behalf of the majority of believing Church members.
Additional information
- Penalties—Critics point out that a former version of the endowment used to contain mention of various "penalties" associated with the breaking of the temple covenants. They use this fact to claim that the temple encouraged violence or vengeance against those who violated its covenants, or that the Church sought to use fear to motivate members to keep their covenants, however, critics misrepresent this part of the temple ceremony, which is relatively easy to do since members endowed since April 1990 will have had no direct experience with the penalties mentioned. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Is it okay to change the ceremonies?
The first thing to keep in mind is that we older Latter-day Saints who first went through the temple before 1990 were told by church leaders that the ceremony was given to Joseph Smith by revelation, that it had never been changed, and that it would never BE changed.
"From August 2001 Ensign (page 22), in big bold print above a large colorful portrait of Joseph Smith:
"The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, 'Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed.'"
FairMormon commentary
- Elder Neuenschwander would obviously be aware that the endowment ceremony has been changed over the years. Therefore, when he quotes Joseph Smith's statement that the ordinances are not to be altered and changed, he is not referring to the mechanics of the presentation of the ordinance.
- The temple endowment film has been changed a number of times over the years as well—this has not changed the ordinance itself, only the manner in which is delivered.
Quotes to consider
“Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles.” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith (1976), 308.)
Additional information
- Changes—Latter-day Saints believe that the Temple endowment is an eternal ordinance that Joseph Smith received by revelation from God. Why, then, have changes been made to it several times since it was first revealed? God’s directives and how He deals with His people may vary according to His people’s understanding and needs. God doesn’t tell everyone to build an ark and wait for a flood. Changes sometimes occur as a result of God dealing with His children according to their changing circumstances. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
many LDS continue to believe that the garments provide actual physical protection:
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
"Smith removed his own endowment "robe" or garment before he went to Carthage Jail and told those with him to do likewise. His nephew Joseph F. Smith later explained, "When Willard Richards was solicited [by Smith] to do the same, he declined, and it seems little less than marvelous that he was preserved without so much as a bullet piercing his garments.'"
Author's source(s)
- D. Michael Quinn, "The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power," p. 146; see Quinn's citation of Heber J. Grant's journal sheets, 7 June 1907, LDS Archives
FairMormon commentary
Additional information
- Removal of temple garments before leaving for Carthage—Joseph and others with him removed their garments before traveling to Carthage Jail. Why did they do this? (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Why would Joseph Smith want to wear garments?...One answer of course, is that God commanded Joseph to institute the wearing of garments. Another possibility is that Joseph believed in magical and mystical things such as seer stones; he believed that putting symbols on clothing would protect him from harm. When Joseph was killed, they found a Jupiter Talisman on his body. This supports his belief in magical ornaments and symbols.
FairMormon commentary
- This is simply pure speculation with no basis in anything said by contemporary sources.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
We have to wonder why would God want us to be unnecessarily uncomfortable? It's especially difficult on women... It's one thing to tell people to dress modestly, but that can certainly be done without garments. If you can control people down to their underwear, then you really have them....Garments are the Mormon burqas - just worn on the inside.
FairMormon commentary
- The author is using mocking language and hyperbole to try to make his or her point —The critic intentionally exaggerates claims in order to mock believers.
Latter-day Saints consider the garment sacred and do not appreciate them being referred to as the "Mormon burqas".
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Where's the Love?
There seems to be an absence of love in the actual temple marriage ceremony. It seems to be more about obeying God and the Church.
FairMormon commentary
- Trivialization —Critics take a complex idea and attempt to trivialize it down to a few simple sound bites in order to prove their position.
This is an absurd claim. The critic simply wishes to trivialize the ceremony by claiming that it is all about obedience to the Church. - The temple marriage ceremony is a very special experience that is performed in a quiet and sacred setting in the presence of immediate family and friends. The ceremony is also an ordinance which binds two people together for eternity. Claiming that there is an "absence of love" is utterly ridiculous.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Our Comments: Even among faithful members, very few people honestly say that their first temple experience was a complete joy or how they could really feel God's love or how Christ-centered they thought the experience was. At a minimum, people are kind and just say that it wasn't what they expected or that it just seemed strange to them.
FairMormon commentary
- Generalization —The non-believing critic attempts to speak on behalf of the majority of believing Church members.
We know many people for whom the temple is a very special experience. Just ask any temple-attending active member. If the temple makes them feel "strange," why do they keep going?
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
We've been hearing more and more stories that temple names are being recycled. Many people are reporting that temple patrons are performing endowments for the same deceased people multiple times. Some people report it as clerical errors while others state that sometimes the temples run out of names and just use names over again so the temple goers have someone to perform ordinances for.
FairMormon commentary
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
"The St. George Temple endowment included a revised thirty-minute 'lecture at the veil' which summarized important theological concepts taught in the endowment and also contained references to the Adam-God doctrine. For example, Brigham Young taught in this lecture that Adam 'had begotten all the spirit[s] that was to come to this earth, and Eve our common Mother who is the mother of all living bore those spirits in the celestial world.... [They] consequently came to this earth and commenced the great work of forming tabernacles for those spirits to dwell in.' *(see footnote) This teaching may have been included in the veil lecture as late as the turn of the century. It is uncertain whether the St. George Temple veil ceremony's Adam-God teaching was included in all temples."
Author's source(s)
- David John Buerger "The Development of the Mormon Temple Endowment Ceremony", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 20, No. 4,(Winter, 1987).
FairMormon commentary
- The endowment was and is a ceremony that can be adapted to the needs of its audience. Brigham Young attempted to introduce the concept of Adam-God into the endowment, as far as it had been revealed to him and he was able to interpret it. He was not able to fully resolve the teaching and integrate it into LDS doctrine.
- After his death, Adam-God was not continued by his successors in the Presidency, and the idea was dropped from the endowment ceremony and from LDS doctrine. If there is anything true in that doctrine, one would expect that truth to be in harmony with what is already revealed. Only further revelation from the Lord's anointed can clear up the matter.
Additional information
- Adam-God and the "Lecture at the Veil"—Was "Adam-God" ever taught as part of the temple endowment ceremony? I've read about something called "the lecture at the veil" that was supposedly in the endowment at one time. (Link)
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Why would the church place such emphasis on the temple?...Money...Control...Church importance...Peer pressure.
FairMormon commentary
- The Church emphasizes temple attendance as a way of helping members understand the importance of the plan of salvation and the atonement of Jesus Christ. It is a way for us to renew and remember the covenants that we have made with God.
- If the Church were emphasizing temple attendance simply for the purposes of acquiring money and exercising control, then why would they emphasize attending the temple often? Would that not simply use up more Church resources such as power, heat and time?
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Shouldn't your entrance into God's Kingdom be based on how you lived your life and what's in your heart, and not dependant on your knowledge of the signs and tokens you learned in the temple?
FairMormon commentary
- The author is "speaking for God" —The critic, despite not believing in God, presumes to know what God ought to require.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Ending summary by critics. If potential temple goers knew that they would have to wear silly robes at their own weddings, and that they needed to learn secret handshakes and passwords to get into heaven, they wouldn't go. And why is Satan such a big part of the ceremony? Where's Christ?
FairMormon commentary
- The author is using mocking language and hyperbole to try to make his or her point —The critic intentionally exaggerates claims in order to mock believers.
Temple robes are treated as sacred. They are only "silly" in the eyes of those who no longer believe. - Are they seriously asking where Christ is in the temple ceremony? That would be the personage who goes by the name "Jehovah."
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Our thoughts
Temples are beautiful buildings that many Latter-day Saints have pictures of hanging on the walls of their homes. If they were just used for public weddings, sealings and special worship services, then the temple would be viewed by members and nonmembers alike as holy places. Baptisms for the dead might still be looked at as a strange practice, but at least it perhaps may have some Biblical justification.
FairMormon commentary
- This is an arrogant assertion. So, if the Church simply removed several of its most important ordinances and turned the temples into something similar to public cathedrals, then everyone would be happy? Latter-day Saints view the temple as a sacred space, and do not have any desire to modify ordinances to make the rest of the world comfortable.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
However the temple endowment ceremony seems so foreign to the nice, friendly worship services we attend every Sunday in the LDS chapels. The temple ceremony seems almost pagan in nature. It's like a ritual we would expect the Druids to practice. Very few members are really spiritually uplifted when they first go through the temple to take out their endowments. Most feel confused, shocked and not quite sure what to make of their experience in what is supposed to be one of the holiest places on earth. We were always offended when members of other churches referred to our church as a cult. We never really understood why -- until we went through the temple endowment ceremony.
FairMormon commentary
- The author is using mocking language and hyperbole to try to make his or her point —The critic intentionally exaggerates claims in order to mock believers.
Comparing temple ceremonies to pagan practices is offensive. - Generalization —The non-believing critic attempts to speak on behalf of the majority of believing Church members.
Many currently active members are spiritually uplifted when they first go through the temple, and revisit the temple often. Just because the critic was not uplifted does not give him or her the ability to speak for the majority of Latter-day Saints and assume that "very few" members are uplifted.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
Adam and Eve play a major part in the temple ceremony and are treated as actual, real, historical people (the first humans on the planet), which indicates that the temple ceremony is not factual, as Adam and Eve are very likely a myth.
FairMormon commentary
- The author is applying circular reasoning —The premise used by the critic depends upon validity of the conclusion.
The critic draws a conclusion that the temple ceremony is invalid based upon an assumption that Adam and Eve did not exist. Latter-day Saints believe that Adam and Eve were real people.
On their old website, MormonThink claims...
FairMormon commentary
== Notes ==