© 2024 The Interpreter Foundation. A 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.
All content by The Interpreter Foundation, unless otherwise specified, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available here.
Interpreter Foundation is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of their respective authors, and should not be interpreted as the opinions of the Board, nor as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.
Nick from Johannesburg. Good Evening from South Africa. Thank you so much (all of you who have contributed to this article and to the responses it activated.) I was praying for more light and knowledge from the Lord about the Temple ordinances recently, and this topic seems quite pertinent. At the end of the day, if we admit that we are imperfect beings, striving to do what The Lord Jesus Christ would want us to do, in all sincerity and honesty, allowing the Holy Ghost to teach us, then all will be well with us, will it not? I try hard to have the Spirit guide me in all things especially in important things like my, and my family’s Salvation and Exaltation. Knowing what is true is very important to me. So, again, thank you for all your inputs, you have helped me in my search, my never ending search for more light and more knowledge, so that I can one day, hopefully, become like my Saviour, Jesus Christ and know all things. I wish you all the very best and would like to bear my witness, that like you, I know that The Holy Bible, The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price are true scriptures. I know too that we are lead today by The Lord’s anointed Prophets and Apostles as found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I know too because the Spirit has testified to me the importance of The Salvation of my Ancestors who did not have the opportunity to be Baptised, Confirmed, and sealed to me. Surely, the most powerful witness of the truthfulness of temple ordinances is this great work in behalf of our families. Turning the hearts of the Fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers. This great work is accelerating year by year among members and non-members as the Second Coming approaches. What a magnificent doctrine. I knew also that The Church was true when I heard this doctrine because I always knew families should be together forever. I still have many questions pertaining to the temple, but I am confident that I will receive this light and knowledge as I seek it out. Again thank you.
BTW
According to Joseph Smith in 1836 all of the necessary ceremonies for salvation had already been revealed:
“I then observed to the quorums, that I had now completed the organization of the Church, and we had passed through all the necessary ceremonies, that I had given them all the instruction they needed, and that they now were at liberty, after obtaining their licenses, to go forth and build up the Kingdom of God..”
http://emp.byui.edu/SATTERFIELDB/Presentation%20Notes/Kirtland%20Endowment/Solemn%20Assembly.html
Although there were some anointings and the washing of feet and spiritual endowments enjoyed in the temple up to that point in time, there was nothing that remotely resembled the Masonic endowment ceremony that emerged in Nauvoo nearly a decade later.
Clearly the ordinances of salvation and related ceremonies for the living that were necessary to build up the kingdom of God upon the earth had all been restored by April of 1836 and there was no need for additional ceremonies that pertain to the fulness of the gospel.
Temple ordinances are NOT part of Christ’s doctrine, and this is made perfectly clear in 3 Nephi 11.
The yoke of Christ is easy because all that is require is belief in him, repentance and baptism. Baptism is the only ordinance that saves. All temple ordinances are NOT of God.
Somehow a footnote to the first quote from Robert L. Millet was deleted. What originally was footnote #4 had this: Robert L. Millet, “The Holy Order of God,” in The Book of Mormon: Alma, the Testimony of the Word, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1992), 61–88; https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/book-mormon-alma-testimony-word/5-holy-order-god-0, accessed Aug. 26, 2015. Sorry about that!
Ken
If you are doubting the veracity of section 110 because of the fact that Joseph and Oliver chose to never mention it publicly during their lives, I would point out that there is a very close parallel between the narrative in that event and the narrative in the New Testament when Christ took Peter, James and John upon the mount of transfiguration when he was visited by Moses and Elias.
After that event in the New Testament, Christ commanded those three disciples to not make public what had happened until after Christ would be risen from the dead.
“And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.” Matt 17:9
I would suggest that the Lord also commanded Joseph and Oliver to not tell about the vision publicly because he did not want the full details of the event available for public consumption until after the death of Joseph Smitih.
Nevertheless, the Lord commanded Joseph and Oliver to have the event recorded and sealed in a church journal so that it would be documented for future generations to read sometime after the dead of Joseph Smith.
I have researched this topic for many years and have found a huge amount of contextual scriptural evidence to support the veracity of section 110.
Additionally there is a contemporary testimony of a person that had personally been told about part of what is recorded in section 110, verifying that something did take place during that period of time, although the full details had not been disclosed to that person.
I would even speculate that the Book of Daniel prophesied of this amazing event in the history of the church which speaks about the “reconciliation for iniquity” and the bringing in of “everlasting righteousness”-
“seal up the vision and prophecy..” ( Dan 9:24)
I realize that there is a high profile author out there that is trying to create doubt in the minds of people about the authenticity of that event, but I don’t think he has researched the topic very deeply.
I am convinced that the event in 110 absolutely did take place just as recorded and that it provides a huge piece of the puzzle in understanding the true history of the church.
It is one of the most important events that took place during the ministry of the prophet Joseph Smith in my opinion. 🙂
Ted thanks for correcting your confusion about The Second Comforter and having your Calling and Election made sure . Separate things neither of which require the Temple. I am still interested in your view of why since Joseph lived for 8 years after Section 110 was allegedly received and Oliver lived longer neither ever referred to it even when Joseph preached about the mission of Elijah. I look forward to your thoughts
Ken, you wrote, “after Section 110 was allegedly received…”
If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that those high priests in attendance at the 1833 meeting had their calling and election made sure, but you are questioning the revelation given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple in 1836? There is some uncertainty about the former but none about the latter. Just because there may be no subsequent recorded words about it from Joseph or Oliver is not evidence that it did not occur. That is like arguing that Jesus never said anything that is not recorded in the New Testament (see John 21:25).
You may believe what you wish but there are two reasons that I do not believe that those in attendance at the meeting in 1836 (D&C 88:34) had their calling and election made sure at that time, but had a conditional promise of it.
First: Many of them apostatized and did not meet the criteria set down by Joseph Smith when he said: “When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure.”
Second: It was in July of 1843, less than a year before he was martyred that the Prophet received the following revelation: “For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.” (D&C 132:49) The sealing of your exaltation by the Lord is having one’s calling and election made sure. Notice that the sealing of Joseph was in the present tense in 1843.
Subsequent Prophets have said very little about having one’s calling and election made sure but have spoken volumes about the work of the House of the Lord, and that these ordinances are essential to one’s exaltation. We believe in continuing revelation from living prophets.
I apologize that one thing I wrote above that is not accurate. As Joseph Smith explained:
“Now what is this other Comforter? It is no more nor less than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself; and this is the sum and substance of the whole matter; that when any man obtains this last Comforter, he will have the personage of Jesus Christ to attend him, or appear unto him from time to time, and even He will manifest the Father unto him, and they will take up their abode with him, and the visions of the heavens will be opened unto him, and the Lord will teach him face to face, and he may have a perfect knowledge of the mysteries of the Kingdom of God; and this is the state and place the ancient Saints arrived at when they had such glorious visions —Isaiah, Ezekiel, John upon the Isle of Patmos, St. Paul in the three heavens, and all the Saints who held communion with the general assembly and Church of the First Born.” (HC 3:380-81)
Obviously all of the high priests in that meeting in 1833 did not receive this blessing. The Lord told them:
“Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.
This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom” (D&C 88:3-4)
This was a promise that they would receive eternal life. As with all promises of the Lord to us, the receiving of any blessings are predicated upon our faithfulness. It is not a guarantee until it is sealed upon us after the demonstration of our faithfulness. As Joseph explained, “When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and election made sure, then it will be his privilege to receive the other Comforter.” (HC 3:380-81) Again it is obvious that many of those in that meeting did not meet the qualifications.
Ken,
There is a difference between the Second Comforter (D&C 88:3-4) and having one’s calling and election made sure, which is the Second Endowment. The Second Comforter is the promise of the Celestial Kingdom, based on faithfulness to the end. The Second Endowment is the ordinance that confirms this promise. It is the highest ordinance of the House Of The Lord. Several of those high priests who were in attendance in 1833 when the promise was given, later apostatized and lost the promise. One cannot have their calling and election made sure without having received the prerequisite ordinances of washing, anointing, being clothed in the garment of the Holy Priesthood and receiving their endowment. It was in July of 1843, less than a year before he was martyred that the Prophet received the following revelation:
“For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with Abraham your father.” (D&C 132:49)
The sealing of your exaltation by the Lord is having one’s calling and election made sure. Notice that the sealing of Joseph was in the present tense in 1843.
There is no restriction on discussing these things in Gospel Doctrine Class. I taught Gospel Doctrine for the past four years and discussed these things freely and openly.
2 Nephi 31 was about the “first ordinances of the Gospel,” faith, repentance, baptism and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. Nephi explains that even though the Lord was Holy he still had to be baptized to “fulfill all righteousness.” That is, He still had to fulfill the requirements. Nephi goes on to say that this is the gate to “the strait and narrow path that leads to eternal life.” Then he adds, “And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this strait and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save. Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ…” (2 Nephi 31: 19-20) Pressing forward implies that there is more to be done. You are on the right path but with steadfastness in Christ you will listen to and follow the words of His Prophets, particularly the words of His living prophets.
Ken, you asked, “why DC 110 was never mention by anyone in Joseph’s life time and the recorded text has been changed from 3rd person to first?”
The first edition of the D&C was printed and distributed in 1835. D&C 110 was not received until April of 1836 and was not published until after the death of Joseph in 1844. As for the changes, the revelations were written by scribes and Joseph made many corrections of unintentional errors prior to their publications, including preparations for the publication of the 1844 edition prior to his death (see Introduction to the Doctrine and Covenants).
You also asked, “why keys were given and not sealing powers. Is it because Joseph already had it since Section 132 was originally given?”
The keys are the authorities to exercise specific powers of the priesthood. The keys included the sealing powers. These keys were given in April of 1836, and Section 132 wasn’t given until July of 1843 although some of the principles in it were obviously known to him prior to that.
Theodore
You said:
“There is a difference between the Second Comforter (D&C 88:3-4) and having one’s calling and election made sure, which is the Second Endowment. The Second Comforter is the promise of the Celestial Kingdom, based on faithfulness to the end. The Second Endowment is the ordinance that confirms this promise.”
That is not correct. The Second Comforter is not the endowment that confirms ones calling and election. The Second Comforter ALWAYS follows calling and election. It does never precedes it.
Here is what Joseph Smith said that explains that the “other comforter” is given AFTER one receives their calling and election:
“The other Comforter spoken of is a subject of great interest, and perhaps understood by few of this generation. After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted.
When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure, THEN IT WILL BE HIS PRIVILEGE TO RECEIVE THE OTHER COMFORTER, which the Lord hath promised the Saints, as is recorded in the testimony of St. John, in the 14th chapter, from the 12th to the 27th verses.”
The fact that Joseph and others were given the “other comforter” and had their “names recorded in the Book of the Names of the sanctified” in Kirtland, in December of 1832 (see Section 88) proves that they had their calling and election made sure at or prior to that time. (which was over a decade before the early versions of the temple endowment began to emerge in Nauvoo.
Section 88 provides strong evidence that section 84 is speaking of Joseph and others getting entering into the oath and covenant and getting their calling and election made sure in September of 1832:
“And he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto him.
39 And this is according to the oath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood.
40 Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.
41 But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.
42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels charge concerning you.
43 And I now give unto you a commandment to beware concerning yourselves, to give diligent heed to the words of eternal life.
44 For you shall live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God.
45 For the word of the Lord is truth, and whatsoever is truth is light, and whatsoever is light is Spirit, even the Spirit of Jesus Christ.
46 And the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world; and the Spirit enlighteneth every man through the world, that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit.
47 And every one that hearkeneth to the voice of the Spirit cometh unto God, even the Father.
48 And the Father teacheth him of the covenant which he has renewed and confirmed upon you, which is confirmed upon you for your sakes, and not for your sakes only, but for the sake of the whole world.”
You also said:
“One cannot have their calling and election made sure without having received the prerequisite ordinances of washing, anointing, being clothed in the garment of the Holy Priesthood and receiving their endowment.”
That is completely false and unscriptural and proven wrong by the fact that Joseph and others had their calling and election made sure long before the temple ritual emerged in Nauvoo.
Any passages in Section 132 which are not congruent with previous scripture cannot be trusted particularly since the original is not in existences and the origins of section 132 are in question and descriptions of the early version of 132 does not match the current version.
You also said:
“Ken, you asked, “why DC 110 was never mention by anyone in Joseph’s life time… The first edition of the D&C was printed and distributed in 1835. D&C 110 was not received until April of 1836 and was not published until after the death of Joseph in 1844.
That does not address the question of why Joseph and Oliver NEVER publically spoke about the event contained in section 110 during the remainder of their lives nor does it explain why it was not canonized until 1876, forty years after it happened.
Guys I have had the same set of experiences that Ted has but must say watcher wins this round Anyone who claims that the temple ordinances are essential must deal with the historical fact that Joseph and many others in the early church received their calling and election and the Second Comforter w/o those ordinances. They had the reality we are left the symbol. If we via the temple ordainances could obtain the reality why aren’t we Indeed why are such topics not even permitted to be raised in GD class It seems to me in part because the temple and the constant harking to spend our time their has obscured the need for the real thing Nephi teaches about the real thing in 2 Nephi 31:6 He never mentions the need for such mystical rites. Incidentally can you smart guys explain why DC 110 was never mention by anyone in Joseph’s life time and the recorded text has been changed from 3rd person to first? Also help me understand why keys were given and not sealing powers. Is it because Joseph already had it since Section 132 was originally given ? And he had already used it inSection 88:2-5. Help me understand. And Ted please don’t condemn me for my inquiry Thanks
Jeff, thank you for your insight. I continue to be awed by the depth and elegance of the ritual worship that Joseph Smith restored.
Intrigued by your quote from the Didache, I looked up several translations and read. Further intrigued, I’m looking for more in-depth treatments. Are you aware of any from an LDS perspective?
watcher on February 8, 2016 at 11:45 am said:
“I can see how this article might be somewhat compelling to those who are not very familiar with the four standard works.”
Actually the contrary is true. As Dwight Rogers and Jeff Lindsay have demonstrated above, those who are most familiar with the Standard Works will find the Temple ordinances most compelling.
Another example from the Old Testament is when Jacob was journeying to Haran and received a vision of God and angels, and of a ladder leading up into heaven. After the vision he said, “this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob then anointed the spot and “called the name of that place Beth-el [House of the Lord].” (Genesis 28:16-19) This spot was on Mount Moriah where the Temple of Melchizedek had previously stood (Flavius Josephus, Wars Of The Jews, 6.10.1), and where the Temple of Jacob’s descendant, Solomon, would one day stand.
Baptism is the gateway to the strait and narrow path, but that path leads through the House of the Lord, which is the gateway to the Celestial Kingdom of God. The rungs of the ladder which Jacob saw are the ordinances and covenants which are required for anyone who desires to enter His Kingdom. His Kingdom is a sacred place because those who dwell there live sacred lives. Before anyone can go there they must agree and covenant to live the laws of the Celestial Kingdom. If they do not agree nor covenant to those conditions, or if they do not keep the covenants they make, they cannot live there. It is that simple.
As one who has studied the Standard Works for the past 50 years, and has administered the ordinances of the House of the Lord for the past 15 years, I can testify that those ordinances come from God, and they are prerequisite for anyone to enter the Celestial Kingdom of God.
“Another example from the Old Testament is when Jacob was journeying to Haran and received a vision of God and angels, and of a ladder leading up into heaven. After the vision he said, “this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.” Jacob then anointed the spot and “called the name of that place Beth-el [House of the Lord].” (Genesis 28:16-19) This spot was on Mount Moriah where the Temple of Melchizedek had previously stood (Flavius Josephus, Wars Of The Jews, 6.10.1), and where the Temple of Jacob’s descendant, Solomon, would one day stand.”
Are you serious?
Have you read the article and my comments?
First of all, anyone wanting to devise a temple ceremony could create and integrate symbolism from events from the Old Testament. That proves nothing.
Secondly, my contention has to do with the claim that additional saving ordinances are needed beyond the saving ordinances documented in the four standard works.
Your comment does not address my concerns.
An event in the Old Testament that could be symbolic of the ritual, and a quote from Josephus, hardly substantiates the claims that have been made in the article.
Where are the high profile, seasoned apologists in the peer-review that are responsible for allowing this article to be published?
Why aren’t they defending this article with a well thought out defense?
Where is Dan Peterson?
Where is John A. Tvendtnes
Why did Louis C. Midgley simply commend Jeff for contributing to the Interpreter while opting to distance himself from specifically agreeing and further supporting the unsupportable suppositions that pretend to be a revolutionary defense for the non-scriptural temple endowments?
I feel like it is a travesty that this article has been published by the Interpreter. Is this really the kind of scholarship you want to present?
This is nothing against Jeff Lindsey. I have visited his blog from time to time over the years and I admire his desire and energy in attempting to defend the faith. He has provided a wonderful resource for believing members of the church.
I simply feel that this particular article, is so significantly flawed and the topic is so important, that it needs to have a spot light put on it before it is taken seriously by those that have not studied these issues.
For those that would like to comment but don’t want to take the time to read the article or my comments, here are the suppositions in the article that I am challenging:
The need for secret ordinances of salvation within the LDS temples above and beyond the ordinances of salvation documented in the four standard works.
The belief that we cannot fully take upon us that name of Christ through baptism and hence, need the signs, tokens, washings and anointings, etc., etc., provided in the temple ceremony.
The contention that some ordinances of salvation were never meant to be published (despite the fact that the only defense given for them by the author are published passages of scriptures from the Old Testament)
My contention is that the scriptures inform us very clearly what the fullness of the gospel is and they detail all of the saving ordinances necessary for salvation into God’s Kingdom.
Joseph Smith made it clear that all of the necessary ceremonies had been revealed and restored by 1836. No additional ceremonies necessary for salvation would be needed in Nauvoo.
On Wednesday march 30th 1836, BEFORE the secret vision behind the veil on April 3 1836 and many years BEFORE the commandment to build the Nauvoo Temple inn 1841, Joseph Smith declared that ALL of the necessary CEREMONIES had been restored and that the elders were to go forth and redeem Zion. He said:
“The Seventies are at liberty to go to Zion if they please, or go wheresoever they will, and preach the Gospel; and let the redemption of Zion be our object … I then observed to the quorums, that I had now completed the organization of the Church, and we had passed through all the necessary ceremonies, that I had given them all the instruction they needed, and that they now were at liberty, after obtaining their licenses, to go forth and build up the Kingdom of God..”
PLEASE CONSIDER CLEANING THIS ARTICLE UP.
To watcher:
I have carefully read the article. I have also read your comments and I find your criticisms without merit and highly vindictive. Dwight Rogers and Jeff Lindsay have addressed many of your objections but you have ignored them. I could go through each of your objections one at a time and refute every one of them but that would not change your opinion nor your attack on that which is most sacred. I suspect that you are a former member of the Church, hiding your identity behind a pseudonym, and are vindictive against the living prophets of God who are accelerating the works of the House of the Lord throughout the world. I will end my discussion with you with the following quote from the Standard Works (which you imply that you support).
“Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them. But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves…Wo unto them; because they have offended my little ones they shall be severed from the ordinances of mine house.” (D&C 121:16-19)
In the interests of expanding the conversation, I will be more heavily moderating responses on this particular topic. Please move to different topics. The conversation is in danger of losing its more considered and polite tones.
Please continue to discuss, but on different issues as laid out in the article.
Jeff, you said:
“The principle of continuing revelation means that there will always be elements that are not already spelled out in the prior canon. This has always been a problem for some people. “
I have no problem with continuing revelation or additional clarification to previous revelation, however continuing revelation does not mean revelation that changes eternal doctrines, ordinances and the gospel plan that has been clearly defined from the very beginning.
Joseph Smith taught that new revelation never contradicts previous revelation. That means that the principle of continuing revelation does not justify the heresies that your article presents.
Jeff you said:
“The Kirtland temple was dedicated in 1836 as a House of God, and was the place where significant blessings and restored keys would be given, including the sealing power (April 3, 1836), but the Saints did not yet have the Endowment as we know it.”
It is not accurate to characterize the dedication of the Kirtland Temple and the secret ushering in of the “dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham” that took place on April 6th 1836 as the introduction of the celestial sealing powers that the corporate church claims to be taking place in LDS temple worship.
There is nothing said about “sealing powers” in section 110, as they related to the fullness of the gospel. Indeed, the dispensation of the fullness of times was not ushered in during that event nor was it ever ushered in during the life of Joseph Smith.
As stated in section 110, it was the dispensation of the Gospel of Abraham that was being secretly ushered in since the fullness has been rejected.
Jeff you said:
“There is in fact scriptural support for the ordinances of the temple, including washings, anointings, baptism for the dead, sealings (Sect. 132, etc.), and the grand Endowment.”
Temple “washings and anointings” are NEVER mentioned in scripture relative to the fullness of the gospel, only to ancient Aaronic/Levitical priesthood rites.
You never hear about “washings and anointings” in the JST account of Adam being baptized by water, fire and the Holy Ghost.
You never hear about “washings and anointings” relative to the gospel of Christ as outlined in the New Testament.
You never hear anything about “washings and anointings” in 3rd Nephi when Christ visited the Nephites in America and the fullness was presented to them.
Finally, you never hear about the necessity of a saving ordinance involving “washings and anointings” during the 3 ½ years, from June 5 1831 to Dec 5 1834, that the fullness of the Gospel was on the earth during Joseph Smith’ ministry.
It was only after the fullness of the Gospel was rejected that ancient patriarchal priesthood temple ceremonies and rituals emerge.
When washings and anointings were introduced in January of 1836, in the Kirtland Temple, they were not presented as a saving ordinance that all saints needed to participate in, they represented a priesthood ordinance for those that had priesthood callings and those preparing for the ministry.
Jeff you said:
“In Jan. 1841, Joseph was commanded to build a house for “the fullness of the priesthood” where baptism for the dead may be performed, as well as anointings, washings, etc., for the “endowment” of the Saints (Doct. & Cov. 124:27-44).”
Yes the reason a house needed to be built for the fullness of the priesthood to be restored is because the Kirtland Temple had been defiled and the fullness of the priesthood that had been restored for the first time in June 1831 had been lost, or taken away.
Section 124 clearly states that the fulness of the priesthood had been lost by the time the saints got to Nauvoo:
“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 fulness of the priesthood.” (128:28)
Jeff, the Lord had warned the saints that if they failed to live consecration, he would withhold his spirit from them. It makes no sense that after the saints failed to live the law of the gospel as detailed in section 42, that the Lord would continue giving them higher laws and ordinances that are even more powerful and significant than baptism.
The fullness of the gospel as clearly detailed in the four standard works provides the necessary saving ordinances of the gospel.
It is a dangerous thing to teach more or less than what the Lord has declared to be the fullness of his gospel.
Of course we believe that remission of sins is complete at baptism. The issue is whether our journey ends at that point. If you accept Nephi’s words, then you should understand the need to press forward on the strait and narrow path after baptism. It’s not just Nephi, either. Peter, for example, in 2 Peter 1:3-10 speaks of many further steps we need to take before our calling and election is made sure. God’s work with us involves much beyond baptism.
Watcher said: “Perhaps one of the most difficult issues that Latter day Saints have to address with mainstream Christianity is the fact that so much of Modern Mormonism is based on non-biblical teachings, ceremonies and ordinances.”
The principle of continuing revelation means that there will always be elements that are not already spelled out in the prior canon. This has always been a problem for some people. The New Testament contains material that was not in the canon of the day. The teachings of Christ during his 40 day ministry contained material not found in the prior canon as well, material which obviously was not recorded and publicized, but which had a profound impact on the Church.
The coming of the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants is met with scorn today because of new material not in the prior canon. While you seem to accept the those documents, you object to the temple because its details have not been spelled out in your canon. But temple concepts abound in the scriptures and the coming of the LDS temple is hinted at in the Doctrine and Covenants.
As with many aspects of the Restoration, the concepts of the temple did not emerge all at once, but came in a series of stages through revelations to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Many temple-related concepts are found in the Book of Moses, published in 1831. It begins with a classic heavenly ascent scene, which is related to the core concept of bringing man into the presence of God. Instead of taking place in a temple, this “Endowment” takes place in the natural substitute for a formal temple, a high mountain. There Moses sees God “face to face” and is able to “endure his presence” (v. 2). He is shown the world that God has created and learns more of God’s works, and is told he has been created in the image of the Son. After God departs, Satan comes telling Moses to worship him, and Moses casts him out in the name of the Son, and Satan departs, ranting and shaking the earth (v. 12-22). God then visits Moses again after this scene, and he is shown more details of the Creation, including the first man, “Adam, which is many” (v. 34). Moses is commanded to write what he has learned and also writes the detailed Creation story. Many other temple-related themes appear to be present.
In 1832, Joseph was commanded to “establish a house, even a house of prayer, a house of fasting, a house of faith, a house of learning, a house of glory, a house of order, a house of God” (Doctrine & Covenants 88:119). The Kirtland temple was dedicated in 1836 as a House of God, and was the place where significant blessings and restored keys would be given, including the sealing power (April 3, 1836), but the Saints did not yet have the Endowment as we know it. In Jan. 1841, Joseph was commanded to build a house for “the fullness of the priesthood” where baptism for the dead may be performed, as well as anointings, washings, etc., for the “endowment” of the Saints (Doct. & Cov. 124:27-44).
In his comments on Facsimile 2 in the Book of Abraham, we see Joseph being aware of several temple concepts such as “Key-words of the Priesthood” revealed to Adam in the Garden of Eden (see comments on Fig. 3 and 7), an interpretation published at about the same time Joseph was initiated into Masonry in 1842 but which he had already made no later than May 1841 when he discussed that concept and Facs. 2 with a non-LDS visitor, William I. Appleby, as recorded in Appleby’s journal entry of May 5, 1841.
There is in fact scriptural support for the ordinances of the temple, including washings, anointings, baptism for the dead, sealings (Sect. 132, etc.), and the grand Endowment.
Thank you for your several responses Dwight
After reading them I am having a hard time finding anything you said that refutes what I have said.
Yes Dwight, there are lots of sacred mysteries that are not revealed to the world. Some are deep mysteries having to do with the kingdom of heaven and God’s economy in the celestial world and others have to do with the kingdom of God on earth. I have already acknowledge that.
I am simply pointing out that the fullness of the Gospel as presented in the Bible, Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants presents ALL of the saving ordinances necessary to enter into the straight gate and obtain eternal salvation in the highest kingdom.
Clearly we are to seek God until we see his face and get our calling and election made sure.
Once a person has received the gift of the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost reveals mysteries to them and after they receive the second comforter the Lord himself teaches them even greater mysteries.
But the ordinances of salvation have always been openly revealed with full disclosure. The Bible and the Book of Mormon contain the fullness of God’s good news and the necessary ordinances and covenants required.
To suggest that we do not fully take the name of Christ upon us at the time of Baptism and that we need to enter into the secret temple covenants in order to fully take upon us that name of Christ is clearly a heresy that is easily refuted by the fact that Joseph Smith became sanctified and entered into the oath and covenant of the priesthood and received his calling and election long before the Nauvoo Masonic temple endowment emerged. (See D&C 84 &88)
I noticed the following declaration that you made on another blog. You said:
“the critics are so determined to make Mormonism look non-Biblical that they have to invent straw-man Mormon doctrines”
Dwight I am afraid that people like you and Jeff are the ones that make Mormonism look non-Biblical to the skeptics by suggesting that the non-Biblical covenants in the LDS temple are requirements for salvation and that these covenants were never meant to be published.
How can Biblical Christians take you seriously when you claim that there are secret covenants that were never supposed to be published to the world.
Of course they are correct when they depict Mormons who believe as you and Jeff do as being non-Biblical!
If it is true that God never intended the secret temple endowment to be publicly known, then God has not done a very good job of keeping his secret covenants secret. They are all over the Internet and before they even emerged in Mormonism much of the ceremony could be found in masonry.
The issue here is not just that the Mormon temple ceremony is not supported in scripture, it is that it is contrary to scripture.
Christ commands us in the Bible and Book of Mormon to never swear by our necks and they warn about making secret blood oaths such as the one that was in the original Brigham Young version of the ceremony.
The covenant between Satan and Cain contains elements of the original Brigham Young version of the ceremony.
In the original Doctrine and Covenants Commentary by Smith and Sjodahl, they gave the following definition regarding the Great and Abominable Church:
“A Church which has discarded the principles of church government established by our Lord and adopted those of Lucifer.”
The whole reason we have been given the four standard works is so that we can avoid discarding the principles of church government and adopting those of Lucifer.
It seems to me that rather than changing and replacing the covenants that God has given us, we should put our energy and focus into maintaining the integrity of the ones he has given us.
For instance, the proper baptismal protocol for new converts as contained in the D&C clearly requires a public confession BEFORE baptism.
“And again, by way of commandment to the church concerning the manner of baptism—All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins, and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall be received by baptism into his church.”
Do we follow that protocol in the church today?
No.
Of course, since you accept the thesis provided by Jeff, you don’t even believe that one can fully take upon themselves the name of Christ through the insufficient ordinance of baptism. You believe that one cannot fully take the name of Christ and receive a complete remission of sins until they swap the secret tokens and handshakes in the temple…
..and you wonder why Biblical Christians perceive you to be non-biblical!
The Greek word musterion or musteria, is often translated into English as mystery. The frequent Latin rendering from the Vulgate is sacramentum, or sacrament or sometimes mysterium. The term denotes more than something that is unknown or kept secret. It denotes esoteric rituals or sacrements which imparted hidden knowledge reserved for more advanced Christians. These sacred and unknown rites were a recurring theme of the Early Christian Fathers.
Watcher cites Scott Brown who discusses that “initiates were prohibited from divulging” the more sacred mysteries of Godliness. Watcher goes on to claim that this means that they are “”too sacred to be uttered at all between humans” or even to be written down. However, the apostle Paul describes how they are to be “spoken” among initiates who are prepared to receive them.
While writing to Christians at Corinth the apostle Paul says to them: “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” (1 Corinthians 2:1-2)
However, more accurate translation reads: “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not declaring unto you the secret ritual of God (musterion) with eloquence or the wisdom. For I determined to not know anything among you but Jesus Christ and him crucified.” He then goes on to say “However, we do speak wisdom among those who are initiated; not the wisdom of this world or of the rulers of this world who are coming to nothing, but we speak the wisdom of God in a secret ritual, even the secret wisdom that God has ordained before the world unto our glory” (1 Cor. 2:1-2,6-7; See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. [Germany; Freiburger, 1994], 480)
In the KJV verse six says “we speak wisdom among them that are perfect”. It actually reads “among the teleos.” Teleos is sometimes translated as “the mature” or “the perfect” but here it more accurately means “the initiated” meaning those who are sufficiently mature in the gospel and are, therefore, initiated into the mysteries.
Paul, then, is saying that he will not speak of the secret rituals to the body of Christians but limits his discussion with them to Jesus Christ and his crucifixion. Paul then says that he, in fact, does speak of the secret rituals with the more mature Christians saying: “we do speak wisdom among those who are initiated. . . we speak the wisdom of God in a secret ritual, even the secret wisdom that God has ordained before the world unto our glory.” (1 Corinthians 2:1-7) The early church fathers also understood this meaning and equated this verse with the secret mysteries. Later Paul says that as a minister of Christ he is “entrusted with the musteria [pural] of God (1 Cor. 4:1) indicating multiple secret rituals.
Here Paul divides the people into three groups: 1) Those who have the “wisdom of this world. . . that come to nought.” 2) Those Christians who are “not to know any thing…save Jesus Christ , and him crucified.” and 3) Those Christians “who are initiated” into the “secret ritual, even the secret wisdom that God has ordained before the world unto our glory.”
In the next chapter he again reminds the body of Christians at Corinth that “I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.” ( 1 Corinthians 3:1-2). . Paul maintains the policy of Jesus that “it is given unto you to know the amysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given” (Matthew 13:11), and not to “cast ye your pearls before swine” (Matthew 7:6). Paul maintains this policy throughout the New Testament. He tells the Hebrews that some of them are still babes in Christ and are ready only for milk and not yet ready for meat (Heb. 5:12-14). When are they to receive the “meat?” When they are more mature, ready to be initiated into the mysteries, which means the sacred and secret rituals of the temple.
Later, Clement of Alexandria, an orthodox Christian Father, also separates humanity into three groups: “The hard of heart”, “the believer,” and “the Ghostic.” The mysteries are not given to the hard of heart or even to the believer, but rather only to the Gnostic. (Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata in ANF 2:524)
Even the orthodox Clement applied the term Gnostic – one who knows – to advanced Christians who possessed certain higher knowledge. Clement viewed other so-called Gnostic Christians as imposters who usurped the title. (Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata in ANF 2:524)
Thus, there were the true Gnostics and the Gnostics who were impostors who counterfeited the sacred ordinances.
When teaching the people Jesus often used parables. When His disciples asked him why He taught in parables “He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” (Matthew 13:11) It was meant for his more trusted followers to understand truths that the body of people were not yet prepared to receive.
And Jesus again taught “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” (Matthew 7:6) Or as it is given in the JST: “And the mysteries of the kingdom ye shall keep within yourselves; for it is not meet to give that which is holy unto the dogs; neither cast ye your pearls unto swine, lest they trample them under their feet.” (JST Matt. 7:10)
Shortly before His crucifixion Jesus said to the apostles: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.” (John 16:12) Luke tells us that Jesus did come back and teach the disciples the “many things” the he desired to teach them before he was taken from them and crucified. After His resurrection, Jesus was “seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3) Here we are informed that, after His resurrection, Jesus spent forty days teaching his disciples of the things of God. Is there any doubt that, during the forty days, Jesus fulfilled his wish to share “many things” with his trusted disciples? We are explicitly told that during the forty days He taught them “of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” and yet Luke does not record in Acts what those teachings were.
Luke writes that the resurrected Lord “Shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3). The phrase “infallible proofs” was translated by King James scholars from the Greek, tekmēriois, which literally means “sure signs or tokens. (See Also Isaiah 22:23)
The early Christians continued this policy. In his younger years Clement of Rome followed Peter around and was not only taught by Peter but recorded many of Peter’s teachings that are not recorded in the Bible. Clement later became Bishop of Rome about 90 AD. Clement records what Peter taught him about Jesus’ teaching regarding the necessity to protect sacred things associated with “my house” meaning the Temple:
Peter Said to me, “Let us remember that the Lord commanded us saying : ‘Guard those secret things which belong to me and the sons of my house. Keep my secret ye who are kept by it.’ …Now Clement you are forcing me with your questions to discuss things that are not allowed to talk about. But I will explain things so far as it is allowed. With the passing of time the more secret things will be disclosed to you….. it is not permitted to me now to disclose these things to you. God has concealed his mind from men and we are under obligation to honor with silence the very highest teachings. Nothing is harder than to reason about the truth in the presence of mixed multitudes of people. I try for the most part by using a certain circumlocution to avoid publishing the chief knowledge concerning the Supreme Divinity to unworthy ears. The teaching of all doctrine has a certain order, and there are some things which must be delivered first, others in the second place, and others in the third, and so all in their order; and if these things be delivered in their order, they become plain; but if they be brought forward out of order, they will seem to be spoken against reason…” (The Recognitions of Clement/Book III/Chapter 24)
Here Peter cites Jesus about guarding secret things having to do with “my house.” This is a reference to the Temple. That’s why Jesus forcibly threw out the money changers from the temple (John 2:15-17).
Many of the other early Christian Bishops and leaders followed the policy of secrecy regarding the most sacred teachings. Examples could be given if desired.
You point out that “Joseph and the first elders were commanded to teach only the principles and ordinances pertaining to ‘repentance’ and to trifle not with ‘sacred things.’”
You seem to miss the point. Joseph had and would continue to be given “sacred things.” That weren’t to be shared with just anybody. Joseph and the first elders were to stick to teaching the basics to people newly introduced to the church.
Watcher, you say it is a novel declaration that “there are sacred teachings and ceremonies that are not directly found in canonical writings and were simply not meant to be published at all.” You go on to say that you don’t remember seeing this before in modern LDS apologetics.
In fact there has been no small amount of research and publications on the sacred ordinances that once existed in the early Christian Church. These have been published for decades. Perhaps you are right in saying that you don’t spend much time reading such information.
Watcher, you suggest that the loss of some parts of the gospel during the apostasy precludes any possibility of some truths being retained. The nature of the apostasy is that some truths and ordinances were lost while other truths and ordinances were retained. The apostasy with its changes, deletions, and additions occurred over a long period of time. Thus, it is not surprising that traces of some correct truths and ordinances can be found in early Christianity and even down into later centuries.
Perhaps one of the most difficult issues that Latter day Saints have to address with mainstream Christianity is the fact that so much of Modern Mormonism is based on non-biblical teachings, ceremonies and ordinances.
To complicate things, even the Doctrine and Covenant and Book of Mormon provide no scriptural justification for the sealing ordinances and ceremonies in current LDS temple worship.
This article provides interesting food for thought and offers an interesting justification for the existence of temple related covenants and ordinances of salvation that cannot be clearly found in the four standard works.
I can see how this article might be somewhat compelling to those who are not very familiar with the four standard works.
I would suggest that your admission that the LDS faith and portions of “early Christianity” share an important element that is distinctly different than those shared by Biblical Christians, should be a red flag for those that understand the importance of using the Bible and the other standard works as our measuring yardsticks for authenticating the veracity of spurious doctrines that are often taught.
The importance of using the Bible that was corrected and the revelations canonized by the Prophet Joseph Smith cannot be overstated. I find your following statements jaw dropping-
“The LDS faith and significant portions of early Christianity share an important element that divides us from much of modern Christianity, namely, the belief that there are sacred teachings and ceremonies that are not directly found in canonical writings and were simply not meant to be published at all.
Such teachings and practices are found in the LDS temple, where we make sacred covenants and obtain sacred insights that we do not discuss in detail outside the temple. To us, those covenants are part of taking on the yoke of Christ.”
The fact that some of the early church fathers (that came along several generations after the New Testament apostles were killed off) may have taught heresies that were not congruent with the revealed word of God hardly gives credibility to the doctrines of modern Mormonism generally or LDS temple theology specifically.
In earlier years Mormonism emphasized the apostasy that followed shortly after the end of the apostolic succession in New Testament times, but now the heretical teachings of the apostasy are gratuitously used to justify our current dogma. My how things have changed.
Notwithstanding the fact that heresies entered into the early Christian church, I suspect that if people such as Clement of Alexandria, speaking of the “rituals of the Gnostics” knew that you were using his observation to justify the LDS Temple endowment he would be rolling over in his grave.
Just as befuddling is the fact that you are quoting Scott Brown as you promote the belief of a “secret gospel” or “secret doctrine” since Brown rejects the notion that the “longer gospel of Mark” represents a “secret gospel” nor a “lection for a ceremony”.
From what I get out of his writings, he believes that the longer gospel of Mark simply represents a more “mystical” and “spiritual” view of the gospel of Christ (which would frankly be compatible with the mystical spiritual rebirth that the Book of Mormon speaks of when identifying the ‘baptism of water, fire and the Holy Ghost” that makes the natural man into a “new creature”.)
According to Scott Brown –
“‘the things not to be uttered” correspond to mysteries “which initiates were prohibited from divulging.”
He seems to simply be echoing the warning given in scripture that the mysteries of Godliness and the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are too sacred to be uttered at all between humans. Indeed, Brown points out that the gospel of mark refrains from revealing the sacred to be written down.
“The mystic Gospel of Mark does not contain these things because they are too secret and sacred to be written down.”
That hardly seems to be relevant to the temple ceremony which is written down and memorized by an army of temple workers representing a wide range of gospel understanding, some being relatively new converts.
The thought of classifying temple ordinances and covenants that are supposedly required for salvation, as “mysteries” and as part of the “hidden gospel” is ingenious but I fear it is illogical and completely contrary to the scriptures.
The novel declaration that “there are sacred teachings and ceremonies that are not directly found in canonical writings and were simply not meant to be published at all” is a remarkable pronouncement that I don’t remember seeing before in modern LDS apologetics, (not that I spend much time reading apologetics).
The interpretive innovation being proffered seems to be at odds with the simple definition of the fullness of the gospel found in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants that is sometimes followed with the strict warning:
“Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.”
Noteworthy variations of that warning can be found in D&C 124:119-120 and 3 Nephi 11:35-41
Also noteworthy is the fact that the warning in section 124 came just BEFORE the current temple theology was secretly introduced in Nauvoo.
It seems we should be very careful about adding ordinances that are not found in scripture.
I feel that your use of the term “mysteries” is not consistent with the scriptural definition of the term mysteries and it seems to contradict the word of God.
The term mystery or mysteries shows up 22 times in the doctrine and covenants in narratives that reveal the following things;
Mysteries are revealed by God to those who seek wisdom. The term has no application to those who accepting the apostolic call to enter into the straight gate through the saving ordinances of the gospel. 6:7
Joseph and the first elders were commanded to teach only the principles and ordinances pertaining to “repentance” and to trifle not with “sacred things” within the confines of their evangelical missionary callings 6:8-12
When the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven (the great mysteries) are revealed by God to individuals they are not allowed to reveal them to others. Indeed, they “are not lawful for man to utter; Neither is man capable to make them known” (76:114-119) the book of Mormon seems to agree on this matter;
“It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.”
The mysteries of the “kingdom of God on earth” (lesser mysteries that can be spoken about ) are revealed by God to the church. (see D&C 43:13, 71:1, 97:5) examples of these small mysteries are provided below:
Greater clarification regarding the plan of salvation as contained in section 76
The physical gathering as mentioned in section 10
The scriptural meaning of the term “endless punishment” as revealed in section 19
The location of where the New Jerusalem will be built in section 42
It appears from modern revelation that the big secrets that God reveals to his friends cannot be uttered from mortal to mortal and that the small mysteries that God reveals to the church through his prophets have to do with a multitude of things but never do they have to do with secret ordinances that must be kept secret from the world.
I find no indication in the scriptures that God has secret ordinances of salvation that are to be kept hidden from the world.
The saving ordinances that are referred to in the Book of Mormon as the “fulness of the gospel” represent the fullness of the covenants one needs to enter into during this probation and they are talked about openly with full disclosure in the light of day.
I would highly recommend that you listen to the presentation given by Richard N. Holzapfel, 2008 Ed Week – “The Book of Mormon: An Ancient Book with a Modern Message”
In that presentation he does a masterful job of showing that there is only one doctrine of Christ and what the fulness of the gospel is.
Perhaps one of the greatest mysteries that God has revealed through the prophet Joseph Smith is that those that declare more or less than the simple gospel that has been declared in the Book of Mormon, are not of the true church of Christ
The quote from Elder Oaks that we do not fully take upon us the name of Christ at the time of baptism is very disconcerting. It represents a different gospel from the one presented in the scriptures.
I love your reference to the use of phylacteries by the Jews. One has to wonder what would have happened had the Latter day Saints begun wearing phylacteries containing the law of the gospel directly after section 42 had been given. Perhaps there would have been a greater hesitancy to enter into plural marriages.
My reference in the article to phylacteries worn by “ancient Jews” also obscures the present reality that phylacteries are still and important and cherished aspect in the faith of many modern Jews.
Hi, just letting you know that the Hebrew words “Shabbat” and “shabbaton” are written backwards (so, like the English reading from left to right). I haven’t finished the article but it’s one of those things that if I had written it, I’d want to know.
Thanks, Loius and Theodore, for such kind words!
One note I’d like to make. A Jewish friend just read the article and reminded me of the important symbolism of phylacteries. I did mention phylacteries in passing in the Summary, but really should have given the topic more attention since it fits so well with the theme as a tangible symbol of a covenant that one can put on. In fact, Alfred Edersheim after discussing the two yokes (yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven and then the yoke of the commandments) notes that putting on phylacteries is symbol of putting on the yoke of the Kingdom of God. See Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, (London: Longmans and Green, 1883]), vol. I, 268; https://archive.org/stream/lifeandtimesjes02edergoog#page/n307/mode/2up
Excellent and thought stimulating! Much confirmation for the revelatory nature of the ordinances of the House Of The Lord.
It is a delight to read and contemplate this carefully written, impressive essay by Jeff Lindsay. I am very pleased to see Jeff contribute to Interpreter.