</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Allen:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
As I've always said, Read the Book of Mormon - pray and ask God if it's true. I don't want you to get the Mormon version of things, I want you to seek out God's version and to find it from the source -i.e. from God through prayer. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've heard and read this little speech many times... OK, let me ask this - I've read parts of the book of mormon, prayed and asked God if it was true, and He says "no". Did I read the wrong parts or do I have to read the whole thing?

Seriously, if God has told me the parts I've read aren't true, then at what point do I keep reading to convince God I really need to know, or was He serious when He told me "no" the first time?

How do you answer someone who reports back that God said "no"? If the parts I've read aren't true, then how am I supposed to believe any of it? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">touche'

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:


Allen, good question. I have been down that road with many people - the short answer is that alot of what you get will depend on whether or not you are truly able to go to God with an open mind and heart. This is not intended as a slam and to some degree I'm sure you'll agree with me, but I don't think you, nabster, steve, Juss or hardly anyone around here could go to God to find out about the Book of Mormon with an unbiased starting out point.

In essence, that's what I try to get at around here. I just want to remove the bias and untruth spread about Mormons - so that if at some point you really did want to know - and let's face it, right now you don't - you could go about it with an open mind.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So if I don't really want God's answer to be "yes" then I am limiting God to telling me a lie? You're kidding, right?

If you guys aren't willing to accept that the answer might be "no" then your whole speech is a lie, otherwise why do you bother with it?

me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no
me: God said no
you: you weren't serious about it, read it again
me: :reads: / :prays:
God: no

from the department of the redundancy department...

...How do you know what God says? Couldn't this just be your head telling you what you want to hear?

You asking me or Joel?

You.

Allen, I'm not saying you have to go to God hoping he says yes. I'm saying you have to go to God with an open mind - neither yes or no. I don't think you can do that - with regard to Mormonism. Am I wrong there?

I mean if you go to God and you have all this baggage that you believe in: Mormons worship the Devil, Mormons are a cult, Mormons are racist, Mormons are perverts, Mormons have occultic rituals, Mormons still practice polygamy, Mormons are going to Hell and so on, do you really think you can approach the question from an unbiased standpoint?

Frankly Allen, I'm surprised and impressed that you've even read any parts of the Book of Mormon.

I think it's important for folks like you to read the Book of Mormon - cover to cover - with as open a mind as possible. Then talk to someone and do some research regarding questions that you may have. Feel free to look at both the anti and the pro-Mormon position. You seem to know where to find anti information as far as pro information I would just point you to the www.lds.org www.mormons.org and www.JeffLindsay.com (he's a pretty thorough apologist) If you still feel that there is so much against Mormons that you can't approach it with an open mind then don't - maybe it's just not for you right now. If you're wrong, just remember, we Mormons think you'll get a second shot at things after we die in the Spirit world and I for one will make sure to look you up - provided I'm right.

Lastly, if I'm supposed to be deeply troubled that you've received a "no" answer in regards to Mormonism - aren't you supposed to be equally deeply troubled that I've received a "yes" answer?

Jusselin:

You have the whole tenor of the conversation completely wrong and you just called me a liar to boot.

For your information Juss, I'm a little more involved in the Mormon church than just going there every Sunday. I've been in ecclesiastical positions in various congregations and I am, in fact, actually a descendent of Joseph Smith's Grandfather.

I know my history, I know what I'm talking about. I defy you to find a single utterance from any Mormon leader anywhere stating that Jesus is not the Son of God. Most likely you SS Teacher had Mormons and J-dubs confused, because J-dubs don't actually believe that Jesus was the Son of God - whereas Mormons whole-heartedly accept Jesus as the Son of God.

In regards to polygamy and giving in to government pressure - go back four or five pages in this thread and you'll get your fill of that discussion.

nabster

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">who is Jesus in relation to satan?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mormons believe that we are all created spiritually in God's image - We believe also that Good and Evil are Eternal forces independent of God in other words - God is God because he is completely aligned with all that is Good and the Devil is the Devil because he chose to align himself with that which is Evil. Mormons point to Isaiah 14:12 as evidence the Lucifer was once in Heaven and that he fell therefrom to become the devil. We believe that Isaiah 14:12 and the War in Heaven in Revelations 12 are speaking of the same event. In essence, Mormon doctrine states that Jesus is our elder brother, Lucifer happens to be one of our brothers as well, he just went bad. So that would make Jesus and Lucifer brothers who chose different paths.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> Why are satanic(like) and masonic rituals a part of some of your most sacred of ceremonies?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I'm not familiar with what would be considered Satanic, you've maybe read some stuff from Ed Decker claiming that we utter some reference to Satan in our Temple Ceremonies, but that claim has actually been refuted by other anti-Mormons (Jerald and Sandra Tanner of Utah Lighthouse ministries) as an absolute fabrication.

As to why the Masonic stuff - I'm sure you're aware that Masonic temple ceremonies trace their roots to temple rituals instituted by God in Solomon's temple. I believe the Masons practice an apostate form of what was once a godly practice. Through Joseph Smith the fulness of those ceremonies in Solomon's Temple and their full meaning has been restored.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">no where in the Bible are these ritualistic necessities evident. I struggle witH Catholicism often for same resons.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">To be honest with you, I don't get fulfillment from the ritualistic side, I get the fulfillment from the learning that takes place in the temple and the abundance of the Holy Spirit that is present their. Catholicism often seems like ritual for rituals sake - that is not the case with Mormon temple rituals. We go to the temple to learn and be edified, not to watch or participate in silly rituals.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Why is the sign of thhe nail and sure sign of the nail a part of mormonism,... why the steeple a nail instead of a cross, pointing towardss heaven from whence Jesus will again come?</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The signs of the nail are to remind us of the sacrifice Jesus made for us. I've never heard anyone anywhere state that the Steeple on our buildings represents a nail - in fact, I've only ever understood the steeple to be a reminder that we are to ever be striving upward toward our heavenly goal.


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">why no crosses on your buildings,</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No crosses because we prefer to focus on the resurrected Jesus as opposed to the instrument of his death. Personally, I've never understood why the reverence for the cross seeing as how hundreds of thousands of people were crucified. If Jesus was the only person ever to have been crucified I might get it - crucifixion is not unique, resurrection certainly was.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I fully understand you are able and have been trained to answer each and every questoin here but thbe fact that so much NEEDS explanation is confusing.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I've not been trained, I've studied this all myself. I think most folks imagine an LDS worship service to resemble something out of Orwell's "1984." Go to one sometime, you'll hear screaming babies an untrained members giving what are sometimes uplifting and sometimes boring sermons. Maybe the topics will be a little different than what you're accustomed to, but the people and practice will seem very familiar.

As to the need for so much explanation being confusing, it all depends on your background. As a Christian, Mormonism is difficult for you to comprehend at first. However, if you were a Muslim or a Buddhist and learning about Lutheranism and Mormonism at the same time, wouldn't they take about the same amount of explanation?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And really why is it so hard for christianity to understand mMOrmons if we are so closely doctrinally te same? I am not jabbin g at you this is real and where i am.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I appreciate that you are truly in wonder as to these differences. As I've said before, I think modern Christianity has gone overboard in embracing an ecumenical approach, when a church boldly states that, "we are right and you are wrong," the ecumenical community of churches abhors them and denounces them as a cult.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
Allen, I'm not saying you have to go to God hoping he says yes. I'm saying you have to go to God with an open mind - neither yes or no. I don't think you can do that - with regard to Mormonism. Am I wrong there?

I mean if you go to God and you have all this baggage that you believe in: Mormons worship the Devil, Mormons are a cult, Mormons are racist, Mormons are perverts, Mormons have occultic rituals, Mormons still practice polygamy, Mormons are going to Hell and so on, do you really think you can approach the question from an unbiased standpoint?

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Maybe not mormonism itself with all the man-made baggage they add to the book, but as far as the book of mormon, I don't have reasons to have pre-concieved bias concerning the content of the book. It's just a book and the content stands on its own. A LOT of the disagreements we've discussed here pertain to the teachings of the leaders of the mormon church, SOME of which they've retracted over the years. Having said that, I believe I rec'd a firm "no" in my spirit when reading and praying concerning the truth of the content. Reading it again won't change that, since the content won't change and God doesn't change, and the Bible doesn't change.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Lastly, if I'm supposed to be deeply troubled that you've received a "no" answer in regards to Mormonism - aren't you supposed to be equally deeply troubled that I've received a "yes" answer?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, as I believe you went to read the book with either a bias towards wanting to believe it or had some other reason for buying into it - Satan is a liar after all - adding confusion to the message of Jesus Christ would be right up his alley.

Denominations in the church are man-made and add confusion and dilute the message and purpose of Jesus Christ - some differences are minor (baptists, methodists, A/G, etc.) and do not affect whether or not someone will actually go to heaven, some are major (like jehovah's witnesses, mormons, branch davidians) and very well could be what keeps people out. That's not up to me to decide, of course, but their teachings do seem to be counter-productive at least, and probably blasphemous according to what I read in the Bible.

i MAKE A POINT AGAIN IN REGARDS TO SECOND CHANCE SALVATION AFTER DEATH....CAPS ughhh... the Bible says it is a ppointed once for a man to die and then judgement, and the Bible also says to be absent from the body(for christians ) is to be present with the Lord. It is also ALL about accountablility and receiving Christ while living,"Behold, now is the time of salvation".
The great commission is to bring people to Christ while on Earth, not after deceased...there is no urgency otherwise. We will just all be baptized for all the dead and they will go to heaven too? Accountability is personal not intercessory. know what i mean?

show me where masonic/LDS rituals go back to solomons temple. i dont find em.
The Mormon temple symbols greatly concern me and hinder my open mind as well, Joel.

why the upside down 5 pointed star? ie pentagram.

The inverted pentagram is the consummate symbol of Satan. It is the official symbol of the Church of Satan. Universally known for its sinister and evil influence, it is also known as the "Goat of Mendez." In witchcraft, the inverted pentacle depicts the Devil's Goat and the Witches Foot. It is ultimately the symbol of the star Sirius (from the Greek word "scorching") or "dog star." It is known by the Egyptians as Set, or Satan. Identified by the Masonic Lodge as the "Blazing Star," it is found at the center of every Masonic Lodge and is the official emblem of the Order of the Eastern Star. The inverted pentagram is the second most common symbol used in Mormon architecture, being extensively used in exterior keystones.

why the all seeing eye?
The "all-seeing" eye of Horus is located over the window of the east central tower. It is known as the "evil eye" and is regarded by Satanists as the symbol of Lucifer!


the sure sign of the nail...
In witchcraft, the grips are used for not only recognition purposes, but to stimulate energy by applying pressure to various acupuncture points or "great points." In the Mormon Melchizedek Priesthood, the grip is called the "Sure Sign of the Nail." In witchcraft, a closely guarded secret among Luciferian initiates discloses the code name for Satan, which is "The Nail."


why the BIg Dipper?

The Big Dipper (Ursa Major) constellation symbol is found on the west tower of the Mormon Temple and was known by the Egyptians as the "Dragon of the Seven Stars." It was also known in the second and third centuries A. D. as the "Seven-headed Beast" of Revelation 13:1 - the arch enemy of the church of God!

why the various stones such as the saturn stone...

The Saturn Stone found on the Mormon Temple. "Saturn is a planet of darkness, long associated with grim, funereal and evil things. In astrology it is called the 'greater malefic' or greater evil. Saturn is named for one of the Greek titan gods of mythology, Kronos. Kronos was a singularly unsavory god who devoured his children."

enough for now...
nabster

Nabster, I'm aware of your feelings regarding the Mormon doctrine of baptism for the dead - that comment towards Allen was not meant to incite a debate but meant rather as a light-hearted joke. At any rate, I agree with you - if a man has had the chance to hear and understand the gospel in this life and rejects it, then a perfectly just God must condemn him - no second chance will be given. As I've stated before, the opportunity to accept the gospel in the afterlife (according to Mormon doctrine) is reserved for those who never had the chance to hear or understand the gospel in this life - that essentially preserves God's ability to be perfectly just. Were they to be saved in ignorance, God's perfectly just nature would be tarnished as those who strove throughout their lives to live the gospel are given the same reward as those who do nothing - not even accepting Jesus as their Savior. Were they to be condemned then God's perfectly just nature would be similarly tarnished for obvious reasons. moving on.

Allen, you said </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, as I believe you went to read the book with either a bias towards wanting to believe it or had some other reason for buying into it - Satan is a liar after all - adding confusion to the message of Jesus Christ would be right up his alley. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And I respond with this: I believe you went to read the book with either a bias toward wanting it to be false or you had some other reason to reject it - Satan is a liar after all - confusing someone regarding the fulness of Christ's message would be right up his alley.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> but as far as the book of mormon, I don't have reasons to have pre-concieved bias concerning the content of the book. It's just a book and the content stands on its own. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I also don't buy this disclaimer of yours, you've written way too much to attempt to discredit Joseph Smith for me to believe that you could judge the book he produced on it's own merits. I'm not calling you a liar, but perhaps you may have overlooked your incredible bias against the man who claimed to have translated the Book of Mormon from ancient records. Just think about it. I also recall you at one point going on and on about there being no physical evidence of the Book of Mormon and the people's it depicted, when I pointed to the existing evidences, you chose not to respond. Again, I doubt you can look at that book with an unbiased eye, heart, and mind.

I also don't blame you or hold that bias against you, I guess I believe there are alot of people on this earth who have been so firmly indoctrinated to believe Mormons are of the devil that they simply can never overcome that bias. I hope that you could remove that bias and consider both sides (pro and anti) equally, but you stated before that you see no reason to trust a current Mormon more than you'd trust a disaffected Mormon regarding what we believe.

nabster:

i've done a little research not a lot, but here's what I've got so far

pentagram: For a detailed overview of this symbol, look to this linked pdf file http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/Stars.pdf

In essence it reviews the use of the inverted pentagram in Mormon culture, American Culture and the early Christian church. It also notes that the first time the pentagram was imbued with satanic implications was in 1854 in a book published by a defrocked Catholic Priest who was excommunicated for studying the occult. He used the pentagram to mock the church. IN essence, The inverted five-pointed star, with its single point downward, originally had no demonic meaning, but over the centuries it has mistakenly
come to represent evil. Moreover, it did not become associated with evil until well after the LDS church had first adorned the Nauvoo temple with the symbol. You can't get after the LDS church for using Satanic symbols long before they were ever considered Satanic.

In general symbols only have meaning to the extent that a group of people apply a meaning to them. To that end, I can only say that the symbols mean something different to us Mormons, than they do to Satanists. Considering also that Satanism really didn't become commonly known in modern culture until the 1900's it's probably a given that Mormons didn't adopt them from Satanism.

For us the sign and sure sign of the nail merely have meaning in regards to our saviors atonement and serve as a reminder to us of his sacrifice

You may also remember from other discussions that Mormons believe we will be resurrected to a either a Celestial, Telestial, or Terrestrial glory and we refer to 1 Corinthians 15:40-41 </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Paul uses stars and moons to depict the glory of the resurrection does that make him a stanist? No. Furthermore, the fact that paul uses that type of symbolism to describe the glory that awaits us in the afterlife doesn't it make sense that we would use that symbolism on a building where we go to learn about the afterlife?

Saturn - Mormons view that symbol as a representation of God's habitation and nothing more.

I know that Satanists and others may endow these symbols with other meanings, but those meanings cannot be justly ascribed to Mormons if that is not what was intended.

Just curious, did you get your information from this website http://www.luciferlink.org/photos.htm

because you seem to quote it directly at times, of course it could just be a copy and paste from other anti-Mormon websites as this is all common stuff.

In regards to Masonic links to Solomon's temple, I need to make a retraction, I've done some more research and found that it is Masons that make this claim and thus far it has gone unsubstantiated. At any rate, I find evidence of the Mormon temple ceremony throughout the Bible and particularly in the OT. does our modern day ceremony have ties to antiquity? there have been books written on the subject - frankly I don't have time to read them. At some point I'll try to compile a bunch of scriptures from the OT that point to elements of Mormon temple ceremonies today. Is it the exact same, probably not - Jesus has fulfilled the law of Moses and some of the temple ceremonies have taken on a different meaning and even a different practice to an extent, but elements of antiquity remain.

If you care to look them up, here's some books I would point to </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> John W. Welch and Claire Foley, "Gammadia on Early Jewish and Christian Garments," BYU Studies 36/3 (1996-97): 252-58; William J. Hamblin, "Temple Motifs in John 17" (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 1995). In Temples of the Ancient World, see Nibley, "On the Sacred and the Symbolic," 535-621; Stephen D. Ricks, "Liturgy and Cosmogony: The Ritual Use of Creation Accounts in the Ancient Near East," 118-25; Stephen D. Ricks, "King, Coronation, and Temple: Enthronement Ceremonies in History," 236-71; William J. Hamblin, "Temple Motifs in Jewish Mysticism," 440-76; John A. Tvedtnes, "Priestly Clothing in Bible Times," 649-704; and Stephen D. Ricks, "The Garment of Adam in Jewish, Muslim, and Christian Tradition," 705-39. In The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1994), see Donald W. Parry, "Ritual Anointing with Olive Oil in Ancient Israelite Religion," 262-89; and John A. Tvedtnes, "Olive Oil: Symbol of the Holy Ghost," 427-59. In Thy People Shall be My People and Thy God My God (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1994), see Jennifer Clark Lane, "The Lord Will Redeem His People: &#65533;Adoptive' Covenant and Redemption in the Old Testament," 49-60; Dana M. Pike, "Seals and Sealing among Ancient and Latter-day Israelites," 101-17; J. Lyman Redd, "Aaron's Consecration: Its Nature, Purpose, and Meaning," 118-35; and Andrew C. Skinner, "Jacob in the Presence of God," 136-49. Hugh W. Nibley's publications in Temple and Cosmos (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1992) include "Return to the Temple," 42-90; "Sacred Vestments," 91-138; and "One Eternal Round: The Hermetic Version," 379-433. See also Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, Offenders for a Word (Salt Lake City: Aspen Books, 1992), 108-17; Donald W. Parry, "Temple Worship and a Possible Reference to a Prayer Circle in Psalm 24," BYU Studies 32/4 (1992): 57-62; Stephen E. Robinson, "The Esoteric Teaching (the Temple)," in Are Mormons Christians? (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1991), 96-103; John W. Welch, The Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount: A Latter-day Saint Approach (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990). In By Study and Also by Faith: Essays in Honor of Hugh W. Nibley, ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks, vol. 1 (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990), see William J. Hamblin, "Aspects of an Early Christian Initiation Ritual," 202-21; Todd M. Compton, "The Handclasp and Embrace as Tokens of Recognition," 611-42; Truman G. Madsen, "Putting on the Names: A Jewish-Christian Legacy," 458-81; Bruce H. Porter and Stephen D. Ricks, "Names in Antiquity: Old, New, and Hidden," 510-22. See also Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, "Comparing LDS Beliefs with First-Century Christianity," Ensign (March 1988): 7-11; Hugh W. Nibley, in Mormonism and Early Christianity (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1987), has written "The Early Christian Prayer Circle," 45-99; "Baptism for the Dead in Ancient Times," 100-67; and "Christian Envy of the Temple," 391-434. In addition, see Truman G. Madsen, "The Temple and the Restoration," in The Temple in Antiquity, ed. Truman G. Madsen (Provo, Utah: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1984), 1-18; Stephen D. Ricks, "Oaths and Oath Taking in the Old Testament," in A Symposium on the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: LDS Church Educational System, 1983), 139-42; Blake Ostler, "Clothed Upon: A Unique Aspect of Christian Antiquity," BYU Studies 22/1 (1982): 31-45; Marcus von Wellnitz, "The Catholic Liturgy and the Mormon Temple," BYU Studies 21/1 (1981): 3-35; Hugh W. Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1975); S. Kent Brown and C. Wilfred Griggs, "The 40-Day Ministry," Ensign (August 1975): 6-11; S. Kent Brown and C. Wilfred Griggs, "The Messiah and the Manuscripts," Ensign (September 1974): 68-73. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">For more evidence look at this article
http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1975.htm/ensign%20august%201975.htm/the%2040day%20ministry.htm?fn=document-frameset.htm=templates$3.0
It cites many apocryphal gospels and their references to elements of LDS belief in general and more to the point Temple practices and ritual

Another article can be found here:

http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1974.htm/ensign%20september%201974.htm/the%20messiah%20and%20the%20manuscripts.htm?fn=document-frameset.htm=templates$3.0

ONe of the most interesting quotes is regarding the gnostic gospels which came to light in the mid 19th century (in other words, after Joseph Smith instituted the temple ceremony - he would have had no knowledge of their content). What is described by them is particularly germaine to LDS temple ceremonies

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">A second type of apocryphal gospel identified by Hennecke is the type usually associated with gnosticism. Gnostics (from the Greek word meaning knowledge) believed they were recipients of a special knowledge, usually through revelation or revelatory (apocalyptic) texts that contained secret rituals and teachings. These so-called gnostics (“knowers”) were hated and persecuted by other Christians. Most of their records were eventually destroyed by their enemies, and the only accounts of their beliefs available for centuries were those compiled and passed on by their orthodox opponents.

Within the past century, however, a number of documents dating back to the early Christian era have been found where the gnostics buried or lost them, but the diversity and strangeness of these significant finds have not brought scholars to any real agreement regarding the gnostics’ identity or beliefs.

Second Jeu, one such text found in the mid-nineteenth century and published in the early part of this century, begins with the resurrected Jesus gathering the Twelve Apostles and their wives about him to explain the mysteries that would give them access to the heavenly treasury of light. The lengthy discourse is quite complex, containing references to special seals and names, altars, sacral food, linen garments, wreathed crowns, and other liturgical subjects. It is understandable that Christian theologians, who could find no similarities to these types of material in the New Testament, would be very suspicious and dubious as to the gnostic claim of association with apostolic Christianity.

In 1946 some Arab peasants in upper Egypt discovered a gnostic library containing some 53 works bound in 13 volumes, totaling more than 1,000 pages of papyri. This library, named the Nag ‘Hammâdi Library (after a village near the site of the discovery), contains a number of works purported to be apostolic in origin. There are gospels of Philip and Thomas, writings of James (the brother of Jesus) and John, and a revelation of Peter, just to name a few. There are also a number of writings associated with the names of ancient patriarchs, such as Adam, Seth, Shem, and Melchizedek.

The biblical Book of Genesis invited more gnostic speculation than any other book, and many Nag ‘Hammâdi writings are either a commentary on or speculation about the creation of the world, the Garden of Eden episode, and related topics. In the Apocalypse (revelation) of Adam, Adam relates to his son Seth the experience of the fall, when Adam and Eve were deprived of the glory that they had once possessed. Then Adam explains to Seth how three men appeared and instructed Adam and Eve regarding the future history of the earth and the salvation of men. The Paraphrase of Shem then recounts a vision of Shem in which he is shown the heavens in an ecstatic journey, followed by an account of the creation of the earth.

A number of the Nag ‘Hammâdi works are dialogues between the resurrected Jesus and his disciples. Jesus is often portrayed in them as a heavenly being who descended to an evil material world controlled by evil rulers in order to grant salvation to fallen man through the bestowal of secret knowledge (gnosis). This secret knowledge is comprised of both doctrinal teachings and rituals or ordinances associated with those teachings. Gnostics believed that one had to receive this gnosis before he could pass by the guards of the various heavens on his return journey to God.

In the Apocryphon of John (the secret writing of John) the Savior reveals to John knowledge necessary for salvation, culminating with an explanation of the various destinies of men and an account of Jesus’ visit to the spirit world after his death. The Gospel of Philip contains references to the importance of eternal marriage for salvation. The secrecy of the teachings that give salvation is stressed in virtually all the documents.

There are a few doctrinal essays in the texts, dealing with such subjects as resurrection, the soul, and salvation. It must be emphasized that although similarities have been noted within them, gnostic documents present many perplexing problems and difficulties to translators. As translations are prepared and become generally available, perhaps many of the problems associated with the gnostics, their identity, and their beliefs can be solved.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">At any rate, in one of the articles I've read while doing a little research the author concluded with this thought:

Perhaps it is best to accept those who claim to be Christian at their word and simply let the Lord sort it out when the time is right.

Whoops, double post - Sorry

nabster,

Here is another link to an article about Mormons and Masons. Clearly from the apologist viewpoint but contains some excellent information linking Mormon temple practices to practices of early Christians.

http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_masons.shtml

There's another article which is posted in the worst format possible so I'll just pick out the highlights

According to Truman Angell, the architect of the LDS temple, the Big Dipper (Ursa Major) is depicted pointing upward to the heavens and the North Star and was meant to remind the saints of the Priesthood and it's role in helping those who are lost to find their way.

stars:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">another element demarcating the difference between the
east and west towers is the use of starstones starstones the starstones starstones are
placed in a row just under the first level of the battlements on the
east towers the center east tower has four stars on each side fig 9
while the two other east towers have three stars per side for a total
of forty stars a scripturally propitious number 28 21 the west towers
have no row of stars under their battlements
the stars make a fine allusion to the higher spiritual ordinances
revelatory responsibilities and presiding position of the
melchizedek priesthood in the pearl of great price the lord draws
a parallel between priesthood governance and the governance of
heavenly bodies the prophet abraham said and I1 saw the stars
that they were very great and that one of them was nearest unto
the throne of god and there were many great ones which were
near unto it and the lord said unto me these are the governingthe prophet daniel refers to the valiant spiritual leaders as
stars and they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament
and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for
ever and ever dan 123 lehi received a vision of the future in
which he saw the coming of christ and the twelve he compares
the brightness of the one to the sun and the other twelve to the
stars 1 ne 19 10 the depiction of stars below the battlements
of the melchizedek priesthood towers would seem to reinforce the
connection between leaders of the church and divine callings
the complete name of the melchizedek priesthood is the
holy priesthood after the order of the son of god dac d&c 1073
what better technique to emphasize this priesthood than to focus
on the birthday of the one after whom the priesthood is named
because LDS scripture suggests that christ may have been born on
april 6 31 two moonstones moonstones depicting the moons phases in early april
appear on the east central tower fig 10
at the opposite end of the temple the moon phase of early
october is found on the buttresses of the west center tower 32 we
know from the new testament that john the baptist was born six
months before jesus luke 136 1 36 john the baptist holds the keys of
the aaronic priesthood and returned to the earth as a resurrected
being to confer this priesthood on the head of joseph smith on
may 15 1829 dac d&c 277 8 131 what better personage to represent
the aaronic priesthood than john the baptist who brought it
back to the earth how better to integrate him into the exterior symbolism
of the temple than to commemorate his birthday</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Still looking for more information on Saturn and the all seeing eye.

Clasped hands:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">carved into the stone panel above the
bottom window in the center east and west towers is a pair of
clasped hands fig 30 which represent the hand of fellowship
and the unity of the saints 93 but the clasped hands seem to have
additional meanings for surrounding the hands is an oval with rays
emanating outward the usual meaning of an aureole of light is
divine sanctification or divine presence thus two interpretations
seem to be associated with the addition of the aureole of light the
first is that the fellowship of the saints is part of building a sacred
community zion the second is that the lord is bound with us in
a covenant which is central to temple worship
for those who enter these walls this house becomes a house of
covenants here we promise solemnly and sacredly to live the
gospel ofjesus christ in its finest expression we covenant with god
our eternal father to live those principles which are the bedrock of
all true religion 94
engraved into the scroll on the keystone above the clasped
hands and gilded are the words alpha and omega these the
first and last letters in the greek alphabet are one of the names of
the lord 1 I am alpha and omega the beginning and the ending
saith the lord which is and which was and which is to come the
almighty rev 18</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">All seeing eye:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">above the second window in the east
and west central towers is an eye looking out at us from below a
veil of pleated fabric fig 31 surrounding the eye is another aureole
of light depicted by a raised oval with outward shooting rays
the keystone in the arch above is blank 95 this is the all seeing eye
a symbol frequently used in pioneer utah this symbol reminded
the saints that the eye of the lord was upon them and that all thatthey did should be in accordance with the will of the lord john
taylor noted it penetrates and is enabled to weigh the actions and
motives of the children of men men9691 in proverbs we are told the
eyes of the lord are in every place beholding the evil and the
good brov prov 15:3 the all seeing eye of the lord was often used
on church cooperative buildings with the phrase holiness to thelord arched over it sometimes the all seeing eye was used in pioneer
tabernacles one is located over the choir seats in the st
george tabernacle
however the all seeing eyes on the temple differ from all the
rest most all seeing eyes have eyebrows above them but those on
the salt lake temple are depicted looking out from beneath a
pleated veil. veils are used to separate the sacred from the profane
the spiritual from the carnal truth from confusion the lord
from mankind the veil separating man and the lord is removed
only on rare occasions of great faith and obedience</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As for Saturn some scholars differ on whether or not it is meant to depict Saturn at all. Some say it is to represent the dome of heaven, others say it is representing the dwelling place of God. That's all I can find.

You also asked why the various stones. Well, if you look at the architecture of the temple there are basically earth stones, Moon stones, depictions of the sun and stars. The idea is to be moving upward or heavenward - ie. the earth stones are placed lowest on the temple with the moon stones and sun stones and star stones above them. Couple that with what I said earlier about Celestial glory like the sun and other glory like the moon and the stars and maybe that will give things more perspective.

Have I missed any questions?

very interesting. sorry i put you through that...hehehe.confusing,no? to a non mormon.
what does te pentagram mean?
nab

Actually I first became aware that the pentagram originally had a Christian meaning when I read "the DaVinci Code" alot of that book is fairly creative in it's description and interpretation of historical fact, but it did note that the pentagram proceeded the cross as a symbol of Christianity in that it's five points depicted the five wounds Christ recieved on the Cross.

Yes it is confusing - in part I blame all that symbolism on the temple on Brigham Young. I know he was a prophet and inspired in regards to most issues involving the church but in the instance of the design of the Salt Lake Temple I think he was a little overly involved and inserted alot of stuff that was mainly of interest to him - and not even central to Mormon doctrine or belief. In fact, I would suggest that most of the symbols on the temple are merely supportive of other doctrines, rather than the doctrines supporting the symbology. You get my drift.

If the symbols were central to our theology, I think you would see them on the temples we are building today - with the exception of the reconstruction of the Nauvoo temple a few years back - you don't see these symbols on modern temples. Nor do you see them on the first temple we built in the 1800's in Kirtland, OH. in that regard I think the exterior design and detail of the Salt Lake Temple was in many ways a personal statement of Brigham Young's.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
Allen, you said </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No, as I believe you went to read the book with either a bias towards wanting to believe it or had some other reason for buying into it - Satan is a liar after all - adding confusion to the message of Jesus Christ would be right up his alley. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">And I respond with this: I believe you went to read the book with either a bias toward wanting it to be false or you had some other reason to reject it - Satan is a liar after all - confusing someone regarding the fulness of Christ's message would be right up his alley.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> but as far as the book of mormon, I don't have reasons to have pre-concieved bias concerning the content of the book. It's just a book and the content stands on its own. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I also don't buy this disclaimer of yours, you've written way too much to attempt to discredit Joseph Smith for me to believe that you could judge the book he produced on it's own merits. I'm not calling you a liar, but perhaps you may have overlooked your incredible bias against the man who claimed to have translated the Book of Mormon from ancient records. Just think about it. I also recall you at one point going on and on about there being no physical evidence of the Book of Mormon and the people's it depicted, when I pointed to the existing evidences, you chose not to respond. Again, I doubt you can look at that book with an unbiased eye, heart, and mind.

I also don't blame you or hold that bias against you, I guess I believe there are alot of people on this earth who have been so firmly indoctrinated to believe Mormons are of the devil that they simply can never overcome that bias. I hope that you could remove that bias and consider both sides (pro and anti) equally, but you stated before that you see no reason to trust a current Mormon more than you'd trust a disaffected Mormon regarding what we believe. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">ain't that sweet

I didn't respond to some of your earlier stuff because when you first came here you used to copy/paste/post pages/chapters of rambling stuff that even tonight when I tried to go back and read it my eyes glazed over. Pages of stuff that at the end even you said was inconclusive, how was I to argue that? It would be easier to read the entire book of mormon

That said, you are being a little unfair in the recent discussion still - when someone disagrees, it's because God hasn't revealed the full truth to them, even when the fullness of God is present in other aspects of their relationship with Him, only when someone agrees with the mormon philosophy is when they are believed to have the full truth of God, even when so many other aspects of their relationship is so far off.

me: God says "no"
you: You can't handle the truth!

Just a bit circular in logic...

and i suppose the dragon and the two headed beast represent christ too?
AFor symbolism you go to many different areas and thier origins. but Joseph Smith was the restorer of the Church. If he was such, why not just go to the original church and it's symbolism if any...? why pull nauvoo(sp) and masonic, and so on into whatg the pure Christlike church is to be, yet eliminate anything Christlike from your symbolism? The Mormon church is doin g to separate itself from mainstream Christianity yet desires to be included, yet is said do not become a part of any other church ...When you say that Jesus and Lucifer are brothers, and we say he was God incarnate and Lucifer a fallen angel.It doesnt make sense. And quite frankly is incorrect....scripturally.
So it seems we will long differ on many things and you will be Mormon and I will not.
Joel, i have long thought much of scriptural interpretation by you was askew and i still do(see Mormon thread previous please). I do not know if that is because of the Book of Mormon or if it is necessary to justify doctrine. at any rate it is not "Christian Church" kind of interpretation it is outside the box , so to speak and it will never(IMHO) by accepted inside mainstream christianity.
There are too many dark secrets and symbolisms, and rituals, and major doctrinal differences for us to ever be in the same sanctuary worshipping the same God,this side of Heaven. It is a shame it is so different....denominations are a part of the problem and i dont like them, but if it allows many different people to find God because of certain practices or the omission of them, than so be it.
nabster

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Joel33:
In essence it reviews the use of the inverted pentagram in Mormon culture, American Culture and the early Christian church. It also notes that the first time the pentagram was imbued with satanic implications was in 1854 in a book published by a defrocked Catholic Priest who was excommunicated for studying the occult. He used the pentagram to mock the church. IN essence, The inverted five-pointed star, with its single point downward, originally had no demonic meaning, but over the centuries it has mistakenly
come to represent evil. Moreover, it did not become associated with evil until well after the LDS church had first adorned the Nauvoo temple with the symbol. You can't get after the LDS church for using Satanic symbols long before they were ever considered Satanic.

In general symbols only have meaning to the extent that a group of people apply a meaning to them. To that end, I can only say that the symbols mean something different to us Mormons, than they do to Satanists. Considering also that Satanism really didn't become commonly known in modern culture until the 1900's it's probably a given that Mormons didn't adopt them from Satanism.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Satanism has been around for hundreds and thousands of years... and became long before mormon symbols came into being - it would have been difficult for them to not have known what the current meaning was prior to their using them.

Satanism was especially popular in the 1600's, the pentagram has been used in different forms of satanic/pagan worship since before the 5th century B.C., definitely imbued with satanic/occultic meanings in the 1300's during the Christian inquisition of the Knight's Templar.

Allen, I've gotta ask you this. Where's this all going? Are you trying to say that because Joel believes in another faith that you say is wrong it makes him evil? I don't see wherer you're going with this. Joel seems like an excellent person who has had an excellent expierence with teh mormon church. Could you not for one second believe that maybe, he can be right too? You know, with every arguement you , nabster and jusselin make, it sounds as if you think joel to be a satanist. What's up with that? Can't you see that he too loves God and Jesus? I don't see how you can do this to your friend.

Joel man, you have put up with so many attacks right here. This probally has some effect on your faith. But listen to me man, iof you believe that you are truely right, never give up. Don't second guess yourself. If this is what you believe, which it definately appears that it is, then you stick with it.