- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
this may be a little disjointed and if so i apologise but i am struggling with a few things and hoped maybe some of you may be able to offer help
1) the temple ceremony has changed – WHY. i understand that its mean to be symbollic but what i dont understand is – why would huge bits of it be taken out
2) symbols in the temple
how much of it is symbollic and am i going to be in any trouble (for want of a better word) if I cant remember what i apparantly need to from the temple when i pass on
not as disjointed as it could hgave been really
lol
Personally I think you can’t help but remember “the important stuff.” How much is symbolic? In my opinion the physical stuff is all symbolic. The true meaning is what I take as important, and the way I always find “the true meaning” is by remembering that it must be connected to the ‘love of God’. How’s that for a non-answer?
I highly recommend the podcast by the master Mason – Greg Karney (is that his name?) it should be in the library section or somewhere here. Listen to it twice, I think Greg offers invaluable insight on the subject.
I agree with Orson on the value of that interview with Greg Kearney in the LIBRARY section of this site. The temple, the endowment/enlightenment process has changed a lot from the early Kirtland “washings and annointings” phase to the present day. The fact that both major and minor details have changed says to me that the whole set of rituals is almost entirely symbolic. A great many endowed members (most?) see it as literal — that we will actually need the signs and tokens in the afterlife.
What can I say? *shrug* I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about this, researching the history and reading what Joseph Smith (the creator) and members at that time thought about it. My conclusion is the set of rituals are tools to transmit ideas. The ideas are real. I believe they are enlightening. I’ve received value from them in my life. That is my experience. I still believe in the ideas. I only share my new views with people who can handle them. That is a tough thing for a lot of us to handle — that feeling we have to get everyone to agree with our new perspective. We don’t.
How much is symbolic and how much is literal? I can’t tell anyone else. I currently believe it is 99% symbolic. I was wrong before, so I might still be wrong
I view pretty much everything as symbolic. It’s much more powerful and meaningful for me that way. I also think the symbolism of the “helper” in the temple is important and profound. I’ve never worried one bit about remembering anything when I die, since even someone with severe dementia could go through the temple successfully as long as they could repeat what someone was whispering in their ear. I LOVE that aspect of the temple.
Since I think it’s all symbolic anyway, and since I believe if any of it is literal we either will have perfect recall or someone standing next to us to help us, I don’t fret about it.
I escorted two different people on their first time in the space of a year or so (about 3 or 4 years ago). On one of those trips, the temple president said, “Everything we do in the temple is symbolic.” The endowment ceremony states something to the effect that it is “symbolic as far as the man and the woman are concerned.”
Frankly, I no longer believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible. So, the only way I can reconcile the temple is strictly symbolic. I don’t believe that there actually were an Adam or Eve, so the story is purely metaphorical to me.
Two things bother me. First, way too many members take most of it as literal. (Both the temple and the Bible, IMO.) Second, while I can accept it being symbolic or metaphorical, it seems like “the church” (meaning mostly the leaders of the church at various levels) uses it as a club for obedience.
So, why changes? Let’s say we agree that death oaths were symbolic. What was their purpose? Why are they no longer needed? Are they still implied? I promised to kill myself rather than reveal things, but my son made no such promise. So, do we have different obligations WRT the ceremony, tokens or symbols?
If the washings are symbolic why has the symbolism changed? In Kirtland, they washed the entire body in spirits (whiskey, I think) and spices. The way I read the journals that means the *entire* body. Then, it eventually progressed to just touching certain parts with oil and now just hands on the head. Why?
If the actual actions of the symbolism don’t really matter, maybe we’ll get to the point where we walk in, say the name of the person, dip a finger in holy water and cross ourselves and that’s it?
Of course, I have pretty much come to see the temple as a tool of manipulation of the masses, both in the early church and today. Since I believe it is all made up anyway, I guess it isn’t critical that it gets changed from time to time.
I have no problem with changing symbolism, because what differing cultures and generations take out of symbols changes. For example, there was a time when ANY member who received the endowment LITERALLY risked life and limb in doing so. They truly were threatened with death for not revealing what occurred in the temple, so the punishments made total sense. It wasn’t, “We will kill you in these gruesome ways if you reveal this,” but rather, “You must be willing to die in these gruesome ways” – which, again, was a real possibility at the beginning of the Church’s existence. As that reality changed, and members stopped being threatened generally in that way, I am glad the symbolic actions were deleted. They no longer rang true AS SYMBOLS, so they lost their symbolic meaning.
Washings and annointings are the same: In a day and age where it was no big deal to strip naked and be washed fully as a symbol, such practices made sense; as that became more and more uncomfortable, our more recent practice still could hold the power of the symbol without the reticence of the former practice; as our society has become almost obsessed with “improper touching”, it’s only natural to change the specific practice to continue the underlying symbolism.
The elimination of the Protestant minister also makes total sense when it is viewed in relation to the opposition that was being faced previously and the changing world in which we now live. What made perfect sense in the former society simply doesn’t ring true symbolically any more for many members – and once the tipping point has been reached and a symbol starts being more problematic than positive, it’s time to change or eliminate it. (Besides, do you REALLY want to go back to the Nauvoo endowment? I thought not. *grin*)
One of the best things I was told when dealing with symbols is to contemplate the “what” (What is being taught by the symbol?) and the “why” (Why is this particular symbol effective or problematic?). That has helped tremendously in accepting the changes I have seen in my lifetime and those that happened before I started attending.
magicmusician wrote:
2) symbols in the templehow much of it is symbollic and am i going to be in any trouble (for want of a better word) if I cant remember what i apparantly need to from the temple when i pass on
I can’t believe I ever really believed that there were literal guards that I would someday have to pass by on my way down some literal road on the way to some literal pearly gate. Rubbish.
But the covenants are nice. I wish they would cut it all out except for the covenants. That is the only part that matters. Going through the veil can be beautiful too. The rest is rubbish.
Ok thanks for all the replies guys and girls That is a big help – its the aspect of needing the signs and tokens that concerned me
but maybe I neednt have worried at all
I found parts of the temple wierd
(clothing)
garments were actually really good when it was cold lol
and as for the bits being taken out
i understand better –
its just the message is always the same – its the way its given that is changing
cool!
Bouvet wrote:
I can’t believe I ever really believed that there were literal guards that I would someday have to pass by on my way down some literal road on the way to some literal pearly gate. Rubbish.I still believe that there are places in the heavens that are guarded. Just who the guard(s) IS/ARE, or how exactly one proceeds past the guard(s), I’m not prepared to say. And the literal interpretation thing I view as simply a stumbling block, a trap on both sides of the coin for those who live too exclusively in their left brains.
It helps me to realize that the Church is not a ‘book’ church, with heavy theological and/or philosophical emphasis using complicated metaphysical vocabulary —- the Church is about *doing* and *being*. So many of us get lost in the analysis (or, conversely, in the rut of tradition) that we forget the value of being as a child.
Bouvet wrote:But the covenants are nice. I wish they would cut it all out except for the covenants. That is the only part that matters. Going through the veil can be beautiful too. The rest is rubbish.
Interesting highlights, Bouvet. I agree that the covenants are beautiful. And the name of the sign given at the veil is the only time ANYWHERE in the Church that we actually pronounce a blessing on ourselves (and our posterity, true). I think that is significant.
I think the five covenants help us accept that we might actually, possibly, REALLY, be ready to pierce the veil, if we keep them to the best of our ability. And if you search the D&C, you find that the Lord was pushing Joseph and the Saints to build a temple, saying that there, they could receive the “keys” to “asking and receiving” — which to me is one of the, if not THE most important teachings in the temples. Give “strict heed” to the teaching of how to “ask and receive”. It is not only taught in the endowment ‘play’, but then a group from the company is invited to go up and actually enact the process.
It’s pretty hard to miss, yet I missed it for decades.
This process was allowed outside of the temples from the earliest times, up until the 1970’s.
It is a powerful tool to assist us in gaining “further light and knowledge”. It is carefully taught, and I think we should carefully listen. I used to think that all this was for the afterlife. I’ve changed my mind over the last 10 years or so about that.
HiJolly
HiJolly wrote:I still believe that there are places in the heavens that are guarded. Just who the guard(s) IS/ARE, or how exactly one proceeds past the guard(s), I’m not prepared to say. And the literal interpretation thing I view as simply a stumbling block, a trap on both sides of the coin for those who live too exclusively in their left brains.
Yeah, I’m still open to a concept like this. Having read the works of various mystics and people with near-death-experiences, I think the afterlife is largely self-sorting. People are attracted to places that are most comfortable for them — places where they resonate with the vibe. We go where *we* want to go. So in essence, places are guarded. Literal, physical handshakes aren’t the mechanism. They are a symbol for the richer, more complex reality. The cool thing about a symbol is it teaches many people at all levels of understanding. People see the lesson in a divine symbol that they need.
That’s what I think about at times.
Quote:1) the temple ceremony has changed – WHY. i understand that its mean to be symbollic but what i dont understand is – why would huge bits of it be taken out
Most of the recent changes were to take things out that people found offensive or alarming (penalties, role of women, physical touching) or that some people couldn’t physically do well (standing up & sitting down). Cultural sensibilities change over time which changes perceptions. But those things detracted from the central points of the ceremony so that some individuals couldn’t participate or felt uncomfortable.
Quote:2) symbols in the temple
how much of it is symbollic and am i going to be in any trouble (for want of a better word) if I cant remember what i apparantly need to from the temple when i pass on
It’s all symbolic. I don’t think memory tests are literal, but if so, I’m sure one’s faithfulness is a better hallmark of worthiness than memory; otherwise, what happens to those with dementia who die? The problem with the symbolism is: 1) there’s no guide to the symbolism provided, 2) there’s almost no open discussion due to sacredness, 3) as a result of 1 + 2, people have forgotten or no longer understand the symbols. We no longer value symbols in our day & age. We tend to take things very literally. Even the human body was used as a symbol in the Bible (and can be viewed as a type of the temple in another way). While masonry provides some exposition on building symbols like a square, compass, etc., there are other symbols that are better understood by looking at world mythology: the serpent, the hero’s journey, the symbolic nature of ceremonial clothing. Some compelling symbols of the temple that I’ve read:
1 – the temple rites are a symbolic rebirth/resurrection process.
2 – the temple rites are a hero’s journey (like in a fairy tale), in which the hero has to see what others do not see, make use out of what others have discarded (like in an RPG), avoid deception, and progress to an ultimate reward.
3 – the temple rites are symbolic of an initiation process, with tests of trustworthiness and covenants at each step (similar to the Masonic rites). As there are no real tests inherent in the process, this is subtly woven into the wording of the covenants.
4 – the temple is a rite in which we take upon us not only the name of Christ, but truly take upon us what He took upon Himself on our behalf. All temple symbols point to Christ if you consider them in this way.
Just a few thoughts that might render the temple more meaningful for some.
Valoel wrote:HiJolly wrote:I still believe that there are places in the heavens that are guarded. Just who the guard(s) IS/ARE, or how exactly one proceeds past the guard(s), I’m not prepared to say. And the literal interpretation thing I view as simply a stumbling block, a trap on both sides of the coin for those who live too exclusively in their left brains.
Yeah, I’m still open to a concept like this. Having read the works of various mystics and people with near-death-experiences, I think the afterlife is largely self-sorting. People are attracted to places that are most comfortable for them — places where they resonate with the vibe. We go where *we* want to go. So in essence, places are guarded. Literal, physical handshakes aren’t the mechanism. They are a symbol for the richer, more complex reality. The cool thing about a symbol is it teaches many people at all levels of understanding. People see the lesson in a divine symbol that they need.
That’s what I think about at times.
Have you ever readhttp://www.spiritwritings.com/TravelsSpiritWorldLarson.pdf ? Good stuff.HiJolly
This is the temple thread. hawkgrrrl wrote:Quote:1) the temple ceremony has changed – WHY. i understand that its mean to be symbollic but what i dont understand is – why would huge bits of it be taken out
Most of the recent changes were to take things out that people found offensive or alarming (penalties, role of women, physical touching) or that some people couldn’t physically do well (standing up & sitting down). Cultural sensibilities change over time which changes perceptions. But those things detracted from the central points of the ceremony so that some individuals couldn’t participate or felt uncomfortable.
Quote:2) symbols in the temple
how much of it is symbollic and am i going to be in any trouble (for want of a better word) if I cant remember what i apparantly need to from the temple when i pass on
It’s all symbolic. I don’t think memory tests are literal, but if so, I’m sure one’s faithfulness is a better hallmark of worthiness than memory; otherwise, what happens to those with dementia who die? The problem with the symbolism is: 1) there’s no guide to the symbolism provided, 2) there’s almost no open discussion due to sacredness, 3) as a result of 1 + 2, people have forgotten or no longer understand the symbols. We no longer value symbols in our day & age. We tend to take things very literally. Even the human body was used as a symbol in the Bible (and can be viewed as a type of the temple in another way). While masonry provides some exposition on building symbols like a square, compass, etc., there are other symbols that are better understood by looking at world mythology: the serpent, the hero’s journey, the symbolic nature of ceremonial clothing. Some compelling symbols of the temple that I’ve read:
1 – the temple rites are a symbolic rebirth/resurrection process.
2 – the temple rites are a hero’s journey (like in a fairy tale), in which the hero has to see what others do not see, make use out of what others have discarded (like in an RPG), avoid deception, and progress to an ultimate reward.
3 – the temple rites are symbolic of an initiation process, with tests of trustworthiness and covenants at each step (similar to the Masonic rites). As there are no real tests inherent in the process, this is subtly woven into the wording of the covenants.
4 – the temple is a rite in which we take upon us not only the name of Christ, but truly take upon us what He took upon Himself on our behalf. All temple symbols point to Christ if you consider them in this way.
Just a few thoughts that might render the temple more meaningful for some.
This is from a while ago but I am new – what a great post., particularly the 4 symbols..
Zebedee
HiJolly wrote:I agree that the covenants are beautiful. And the name of the sign given at the veil is the only time ANYWHERE in the Church that we actually pronounce a blessing on ourselves (and our posterity, true). I think that is significant.
Speaking of that, I came up with a little melody to it that I hum. I even set it to music in a midi file.
I never had anywhere to share it until now. See if you can follow it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.