PDA

View Full Version : An LDS leader out and out lies again! (So what else is new?)


Exmo-Robertson
July 8th 2003, 04:19 PM
Would Joseph Smith be happy with the Church today?
This comes from: http://www.think-link.org/think/temples/temple_changes.htm


Here's a quote from a recent Ensign Magazine:

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.""

This is from an article specifically on the temple ordinances. The author of the article is a General Authority, so he must know that the temple ordinances have gone through major revisions - including deletions of covenants, teachings and ordinances - over the last 160 years.

To back up the Joseph Smith quote used in the August 2001 issue of the Ensign Magazine:

"No jot, iota, or tittle of the temple rites is otherwise than uplifting and sanctifying. In every detail the endowment ceremony contributes to covenants of morality of life, consecration of person to high ideals, devotion to truth, patriotism to nation, and allegiance to God."
- Apostle James E. Talmage, The House of the Lord, 1968, p. 84

"Now the purpose in Himself in the winding up scene of the last dispensation is that all things pertaining to that dispensation should be conducted precisely in accordance with the preceding dispensations.... He set the temple ordinances to be the same forever and ever and set Adam to watch over them, to reveal them from heaven to man, or to send angels to reveal them."
- Joseph Smith, History of the Church, vol.4, p. 208

"As temple work progresses, some members wonder if the ordinances can be changed or adjusted. These ordinances have been provided by revelation, and are in the hands of the First Presidency. Thus, the temple is protected from tampering."
- W. Grant Bangerter, executive director of the Temple Department and a member of the First Quorum of Seventy, Deseret News, Church Section, January 16, 1982

"...God is unchangeable, the same yesterday, today and forever... The great mistake made down through the ages by teachers of Christianity, is that they have supposed they could place their own private interpretation upon scriptures, allow their own personal convenience to become a controlling factor, and change the basis of Christian law and practice to suit themselves. This is apostasy."
- Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

"...the endowments have never changed and can never change; as I understand it; it has been so testified, and that Joseph Smith Jr., himself was the founder of the endowments."
- Senator Reed Smoot, Reed Smoot Case, vol. 3, p. 185

"...build a house to my name, for the Most High to dwell therein. For there is not a place found on earth that he may come to and restore again that which was lost unto you, or which he hath taken away, even the fullness of the priesthood.... And verily I say unto you, let this house be built unto my name, that I may reveal mine ordinances therein... For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fullness of times. And I will show unto my servant Joseph all things pertaining to this house, and the priesthood thereof, and the place whereon it shall be built."
- Jesus Christ Himself, Doctrine and Covenants 124:27-28, 40-42

"The Gospel can not possibly be changed.... the saving principles must ever be the same. They can never change.... the Gospel must always be the same in all of its parts.... no one can change the Gospel... if they attempt to do so, they only set up a man-made system which is not the Gospel, but is merely a reflection of their own views.... if we substitute 'any other Gospel,' there is no salvation in it.... the Lord and His Gospel remain the same--always."
- Prophet's Message, Church News, June 5, 1965

Here's the Paradox:

The temple sealing ceremony (which is required for salvation) itself has gone through major changes over the years. so have the very covenants in the temple. In fact, the ordinances and teachings in the temple endowment ceremony went through a significant change as recently as April 1990!

See: http://helpingmormons.org/Altered.htm

If these were divinely restored in their complete form from "the foundation of the world" then why have they kept changing? And if Smith says they can never be altered OR changed, how come the Church did it? Who got it wrong, the prophet Smith or his only true Church? Either way, it smells like a hoax.

Don't take my word for it. Here' a comprehensive list of all the changes in the temple covenants, ceremonies and ordinances made in April 1990:

http://helpingmormons.org/compare.htm

Don't fall for the excuse that the ceremony is just a vehicle for the ordinance. If it's just a vehicle, then what IS the ordinance? If it includes the covenants, oaths, handshakes, signs, keywords or even words at the veil, then they have changed significantly over the years.

We're not talking about a blessing or a prayer that can be changed. We're talking about revealed temple ordinances that are suposed to be free from the tainting of men.

The words in the temple ordinances are just as revealed and un-alterable as the words in the sacrament prayer. The ordinance of sealing must be said correctly, just like the temple endowment ceremony or it's not valid. Every believing Mormon knows the reason for this is that they are revealed as the saving ordinances that can't change. Christ in the Book of Mormon taught this very principle when he gave the Nephites the exact same words used today for the sacrament. The temple ordinances are no different.

What about those poor young Priests in Sacrament Meeting who happen to say a word wrong in the sacrament prayer? Why embarrass them and make them say it exactly right if the words are just a "vehicle?" If the sacrament ordinance can't change, then why can the temple ordinances change?


Warning: The links provided do reveal actual parts of the ceremony itself.

John Powell
July 11th 2003, 02:13 AM
JOHN MORMON:
You still don't seem to understand, Dana. MAN must not change what God has ordained. God, of course, can order things to be changed.

Of course, the temple ceremony today is not identically the same as that given to Adam. Who would play the roles of Adam and Eve and the others? Maybe angels?

This is my own opinion, but I think it is the "core" that is the same, namely learning the mysteries of the creation and such things, the making of grave covenants with God with the acceptance of penalties for failure to comply.

I suspect they used strong words to discourage temple workers from adlibing. Temple actors were to memorize the script and repeat it faithfully, just like the sacrament prayers.

John Powell

Exmo-Robertson
July 11th 2003, 03:21 AM
Today @ 07:13 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=146291#post146291)
John Powell:

JOHN MORMON:
You still don't seem to understand, Dana. MAN must not change what God has ordained. God, of course, can order things to be changed.

Then you disagree with your own prophet Joseph Smith who made it clear that no change is to be allowed.

Today @ 07:13 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=146291#post146291)
John Powell:

Of course, the temple ceremony today is not identically the same as that given to Adam. Who would play the roles of Adam and Eve and the others? Maybe angels?

Pure speculation on your part since there is no record of a temple ever being built during their time.

Today @ 07:13 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=146291#post146291)
John Powell:

This is my own opinion, but I think it is the "core" that is the same, namely learning the mysteries of the creation and such things, the making of grave covenants with God with the acceptance of penalties for failure to comply.

Isn't it interesting that the penalties were removed in 1990?

Today @ 07:13 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=146291#post146291)
John Powell:

I suspect they used strong words to discourage temple workers from adlibing. Temple actors were to memorize the script and repeat it faithfully, just like the sacrament prayers.

John Powell

I could believe that the live performance of the ceremony in the days before film were very interesting.

John Powell
July 11th 2003, 03:53 AM
JOHN MORMON (JM):
You still don't seem to understand, Dana. MAN must not change what God has ordained. God, of course, can order things to be changed. ”

EXMO-ROBERTSON (EXR):
Then you disagree with your own prophet Joseph Smith who made it clear that no change is to be allowed.


JM:
I don't think so. I think I agree that MAN should not change such things unless God directs the change. Did Joseph make it clear that God would never change anything? Wasn't there a big change from the Mosaic Law to the Christian Law?

JOHN MORMON:
Of course, the temple ceremony today is not identically the same as that given to Adam. Who would play the roles of Adam and Eve and the others? Maybe angels?

EXR:
Pure speculation on your part since there is no record of a temple ever being built during their time.


JM:
You don't seem to understand well enough the Mormon view of "places suitable for temple ordinances," Dana. One can justifiably do those sacred ordinances in holy places, not only within the walls of a building. Wouldn't you agree that the Garden of Eden was a holy place? Wasn't the mountain where Moses spoke to God such a holy place? What about the traveling tabernacle? When such a rigid structure can be built, however, sometimes the Lord requires it.

JM:
This is my own opinion, but I think it is the "core" that is the same, namely learning the mysteries of the creation and such things, the making of grave covenants with God with the acceptance of penalties for failure to comply.

EXR:
Isn't it interesting that the penalties were removed in 1990?


JM:
Are you suggesting there are no penalties implied for violating the covenants in the current version of the ceremony? I didn't think so.

Notice that I didn't claim that certain specific penalties were necessarily "core" to the ceremony. What is core to the ceremony must not be changed by my definition. The question is whether what I listed really is core, not whether what is core has been changed.

Yes, it's interesting and understandable. It is my opinion that those parts of the penalties were removed because they was discouraging too many people from attending the temple. Perhaps too many women were bothered by their graphic nature. God wants people to take the covenants seriously, so He sometimes uses graphic images. Earlier members needed them. However, society has become less violent today, so those words sound unnecessarily harsh.

God, of course, anticipated that He would direct the prophet to change that part of the ceremony when the time was right.

JM:
I suspect they used strong words to discourage temple workers from adlibing. Temple actors were to memorize the script and repeat it faithfully, just like the sacrament prayers.

EXR:
I could believe that the live performance of the ceremony in the days before film were very interesting.


JM:
They still did them live at the SL temple and a few other places. They were much longer and potentially harder to hear, however, so I was not strongly motivated to experience them.

John Powell