- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
http://www.ldsendowment.org/parallelintro.html Dande48 included the link above in his comment about the 1990 deletion of the figurative nature of the creation of Adam and Eve. I inserted the actual quote, removed the link, and wrote an Admin Note saying we would talk about whether or not to include the link.
We have a lot of readers and lurkers who will be upset greatly if we provide the link, even though the site is not anti-Mormon. Many of those lurkers are church leaders.
I am not comfortable with the link, since I think the risks (misunderstanding of this site and our mission) greatly outweigh the benefits.
What do you all think?
I’m fine with just quoting the portion of the site that’s relevant to what’s being discussed in the thread. If there needs to be admin justification I’d say exactly what you said here, StayLDS tries to cover some of the orthodox spectrum so that people don’t immediately dismiss it as anti and that some people may be uncomfortable with the temple script being posted, even though that site doesn’t include the small portions people are under covenant not to talk about.
I agree with both of you. I think Nibbler’s additional Admin statement or something similar should be posted. The temple is sacred to many people, especially traditional spouse’s, we don’t need to be the impetus for additional conflict in this area. Sorry I initially overlooked this post. I’m good with just the text. I am a believer that the only thing I covenanted not to reveal are thee signs and tokens, but I recognize that most members have some irrational fear of discussing anything that happens inside the temple :eh: and that some of those are indeed lurkers and even participants here.Fun reading the changes. One of my thoughts is that it would be much harder to make to case for a wise and brave mother Eve doing what had to be done given the older endowment wording. It is almost chiasmic in that Eve hearkened to Satan and Adam hearkened to Eve, his wife – therefore part of the solution is for Eve to hearken to Adam her husband as he hearkens directly to God.
DarkJedi wrote:
Sorry I initially overlooked this post. I’m good with just the text. I am a believer that the only thing I covenanted not to reveal are thee signs and tokens, but I recognize that most members have some irrational fear of discussing anything that happens inside the temple:eh: and that some of those are indeed lurkers and even participants here.
Quote:You must keep in mind that you are under a solemn obligation never to speak outside of the temple of the Lord of the things you see and hear in this sacred place.
That quote was taken from the lecture at the veil which has since been removed. Interesting question, does this mean that people that received the endowment prior to 1990 are under solemn obligation to not reveal anything while those of us post 1990 are only obligated to keep the signs and tokens secret? Or since the lecture at the veil was removed does that then release all the pre 1990 individuals from that particular part of their solemn obligations?
If it was the governing law, multiple apostles would have broken it. In other words, I’m not worried about it.
The website states:
Quote:This website presents the temple ceremony with a degree of transparency that many Latter-day Saints will find uncomfortable. However, the site does not reveal any information that is protected by covenants of non-disclosure.
The site probably would make most members uncomfortable, right? But it is technically correct…nothing is revealed that is covenanted not to reveal.
Roy wrote:Or since the lecture at the veil was removed does that then release all the pre 1990 individuals from that particular part of their solemn obligations?
My vote: If it was removed…then it is no longer part of it.Roy wrote:
That quote was taken from the lecture at the veil which has since been removed. Interesting question, does this mean that people that received the endowment prior to 1990 are under solemn obligation to not reveal anything while those of us post 1990 are only obligated to keep the signs and tokens secret? Or since the lecture at the veil was removed does that then release all the pre 1990 individuals from that particular part of their solemn obligations?
We had that discussion in one of Joni’s threads.
Personally I choose to obey the temple covenants that will be in place in the year 4197. A good vintage.
Quote:Personally I choose to obey the temple covenants that will be in place in the year 4197. A good vintage.
Best to never sell a good wine before it’s time.
😮 I also found the link good reading. I was endowed in 1983, but didn’t attend the temple much in those days because of distance – Washington DC is a 6 hour drive from here. I honestly don’t recall the lecture at the end, but I do recall some of the other changes. Maybe by that point in the endowment I was feeling like “Can I just go now?” I vote is that the lecture was removed, therefore there is no obligation to abide by it anymore – just like the penalties. What actually jumped out at me the most was how much more Eve is mentioned in the changes.
We still have changes that need to be made to remove much of the sexism of the endowment, but most members have no idea how far we have come from the original in that regard. Roy wrote:
One of my thoughts is that it would be much harder to make to case for a wise and brave mother Eve doing what had to be done given the older endowment wording. It is almost chiasmic in that Eve hearkened to Satan and Adam hearkened to Eve, his wife – therefore part of the solution is for Eve to hearken to Adam her husband as he hearkens directly to God.
I had a theory that maybe as sexism became more antiquated and the theory of wise and brave mother Eve grew in popularity that the endowment was changed to better fit the modern sensibilities.
Upon further research it appears that the basis for “Eve’s noble choice” comes largely from the book of Moses and is at least as old as the creation of the endowment. So it appears to me that the endowment was not in harmony on this point with the BofA and two different depictions of Eve’s actions were allowed to continue side by side.
Since 1990 the negative endowment depiction has been partially muted.
Interesting.
This leads me to wonder if BY maybe was behind some of the sexist stuff in the endowment or maybe that JS was just not very consistent on this point.
I have no doubt about that, Roy. BY might have been the only person alive who could have led the Saints westward and succeeded in establishing the foundation of the modern church – but his leadership came with a lot of baggage, as well.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.