What does the temple mean to you?  Why do you go to the temple?  Do you have a short experience you’d like to share?  Do you have a testimony of the temple you think others could benefit hearing?  Does the temple have an important place in your life?  What have you learned about the temple that you’d like to teach others about?  Is the temple a blessing to you?  How has the temple changed your life?  What is it that makes the temple different from the rest of ordinary life?  Have you been privileged to do temple work for your ancestors?  What was it like?  Are you grateful for the temple?  Why?  Has the temple brought you closer to our Savior, Jesus Christ?

Here is an excellent example from a convert who has been a member of the Church for 11 years, and who has a genuinely powerful testimony of the temple.  Press the play button below:

Thank you, brother, for sharing with us your witness and testimony of the temple and the Holy Ghost.  You’ve blessed my life today.

What could you share with us about the temple?

The method is the same.  Just click the “Call Me” button below, enter in your name (or “anonymous”), your phone number, select “keep number private,” and then click “Connect.”  You will receive a phone call and be connected straight to the TempleStudy.com voicemail where you can share with us your message (3 minute limit). In a few days I’ll select some to share with everyone.

Feel free to be a missionary today and share what the temple means to you.  It’s easy and you could make a positive difference in someone’s life by something you share.

Mormon Thoughts on the Temple – Round #2

The way we’re going to do this is using a brand-new service called Google Voice.  I love new technology, and especially when I can find new ways to use new technology to further the work of the kingdom of God.  In this case, I’ve found a way that I can use Google Voice to collect voicemail from you, sort through them, and then embed those messages into a future post on TempleStudy.com for all to hear.  Here is how it’ll work:

1. Click on the “Call Me” button below.
2. Enter your name (or just type “anonymous”), your phone number, and please select the checkbox to “keep number private.”
3. Click the “Connect” button.
4. Google Voice will call your phone and connect you directly with my TempleStudy.com voicemail.  (It might take a couple minutes for the call to come through after clicking “Connect”)
5. You’ll hear a short recorded message from me, and then you’ll have the opportunity to share your message.  (You can share your name if you want, or keep it completely anonymous).
6. You have a limit of 3 minutes, so you might want to keep your eye on the time.
7. Once you are done, you just hang up.
8. I will receive your voicemail, and a transcription of your message.
9. I will sort through all the messages, and in a couple days I will post some of them on TempleStudy.com for all our readers to hear.

It’s as simple as that.  Easy!  This should be a fun experiment, and will give you an opportunity to share your insights and feelings about the temple, and how the temple has made a difference in your life.

You don’t have to be a member of the LDS Church to share your thoughts about the temple either.  If you attended an open house of a temple in your area, or have other experiences with Mormons and LDS temples, please share them.  Of course, please keep comments positive; I will not publish derogatory messages.

So this is a great way to literally make your voice be heard using “New Media,” just as Elder M. Russell Ballard has encouraged:

This is your world, the world of the future, with inventions undreamed of that will come in your lifetime as they have in mine. How will you use these marvelous inventions? More to the point, how will you use them to further the work of the Lord?…

Words create conversations, and conversations create understanding… In many cases, it is with words that you will accomplish the great things that you will now set out to do.  And it's principally about ways to share those words that I want to talk to you today…

The Lord over the centuries has had a hand in inspiring people to invent tools that facilitate the spreading of the gospel. The Church has adopted and embraced those tools, including print, broadcast media, and now the Internet…

Today we have a modern equivalent of the printing press in the Internet and all that it means. The Internet allows everyone to be a publisher, to have their voice heard, and it is revolutionizing society.  Before the Internet, there were great barriers to printing. It took money, power, or influence and a great amount of time to publish. But today, because of the emergence of what some call New Media, made possible by the Internet, many of those barriers have been removed. New Media consists of tools on the Internet that make it possible for nearly anyone to publish or broadcast to either a large or a niche audience… The emergence of New Media is facilitating a world-wide conversation on almost every subject including religion, and nearly everyone can participate. This modern equivalent of the printing press is not reserved only for the elite…

Again, readers or viewers are free to add their comments and join in what becomes an ongoing, worldwide conversation…

That word conversation is important. There are conversations going on about the Church constantly. Those conversations will continue whether or not we choose to participate in them. But we cannot stand on the sidelines while others, including our critics, attempt to define what the Church teaches. While some conversations have audiences in the thousands or even millions, most are much, much smaller.  But all conversations have an impact on those who participate in them. Perceptions of the Church are established one conversation at a time…

Now all of you know that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are constantly reminded and encouraged to share the gospel with others. The Church is always looking for the most effective ways to declare our message…

Now, … may I ask that you join the conversation by participating on the Internet, particularly the New Media, to share the gospel and to explain in simple, clear terms the message of the Restoration [including the temple].  Most of you already know that if you have access to the Internet you can … begin sharing what you know to be true…

We are living in a world saturated with all kinds of voices. Perhaps now, more than ever, we have a major responsibility as Latter-day Saints to define ourselves, instead of letting others define us…

Others have recorded and posted their testimonies of the Restoration, the teachings of the Book of Mormon, and other gospel subjects [like the temple] on popular video-sharing sites.  You, too, can tell your story to nonmembers in this way.  Use stories and words that they will understand. Talk honestly and sincerely about the impact the gospel [and temple] has had in your life, how has it helped you overcome weaknesses or challenges, and helped define your values. The audiences for these and other New Media tools may often be small, but the cumulative effect of thousands of such stories can be great.  The combined effort is certainly worth the outcome if but a few are influenced by your words of faith and love of God and His son Jesus Christ…

Do not be afraid to share with others your story, your experiences as a follower of the Lord, Jesus Christ. We all have interesting stories that have influenced our identity.  Sharing those stories is a non-threatening way to talk to others. Telling those stories can help demystify the Church. We've recently been made aware that the reason many people believe we are secretive is because they think our worship services held in 18,000 plus chapels that we have around the world are closed on Sunday's to nonmembers. Most think they can only attend if someone invites them. They've gained some of that perception from stories in the media about the requirements for entering one of our 126 dedicated temples.  They confuse our temple worship with our Sunday worship. You could help overcome this and other misconceptions through your own sphere of influence, which ought to include the Internet…

Let us all stand firmly and speak with faith in sharing our message with the world.  Many of you are returned missionaries and can carry on meaningful conversation in the language you learned on your mission.  Your outreach can be international…

Our position is solid; the Church is true. We simply need to have a conversation, as friends in the same room would have, always guided by the promptings of the Spirit and constantly remembering the Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ which reminds us of how precious are the children of our Father in Heaven…

Let your voice be heard in this great cause of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is taking Elder Ballard’s admonition and counsel one step further and allowing you to literally let your voice be heard about the temple.  And you can even keep it completely anonymous if you like.  But most of all, as Elder Ballard said, don’t be afraid to share with others your story, your experience, and your testimony.  It could change lives.

Mormon Thoughts About the Temple Using Google Voice

“Some day we will live the law of consecration again, but until then we must be ‘willing’ to live it.”

“It is Church doctrine that the full Law of Consecration was suspended by the Lord through the Prophet in 1834.”

“My belief is that things will get progressively worse until the actual Second Coming when Christ will institute the law of consecration.”

Have you ever heard these types of statements before?  Each one comes from active, church-going, temple-attending, members of the Church.  Each of them was said to me in conversation over the past two weeks.  Each one is also, unfortunately, untrue. 

We have some common myths in the Church, and one of the biggest surrounds the law of consecration.  I was taught the same sort of thing above growing up in Sandy, Utah, and believed it for a long time.  Whenever we spoke about the law of consecration in our church meetings the discussion usually surrounded some common points.  See if these sound familiar:

• The law of consecration/United Order was implemented by Joseph Smith in the early church.
• It involved the Saints giving everything they had over to the church, including all their possessions.
• Members failed to live the law (the higher law) so the Lord withdrew it and gave the law of tithing (the lower law) in its stead.
• In a future day the prophet will require us to live the law of consecration again.

There are many misunderstandings and fallacies in these statements that I’ve learned over the years, particularly reading Hugh Nibley’s many comments on the subject.  Prophets and apostles have also debunked these, yet somehow the myths continue to be perpetuated, much to our own spiritual detriment in building up Zion.

Most recently I attended the 37th annual Sidney B. Sperry Symposium at BYU on October 24-25, where there was some excellent presentations on different aspects of “the Law.”  One of the best presentations I’ve ever heard on the law of consecration was given by Steven C. Harper entitled “All Things are the Lord’s: The Law of Consecration in the Doctrine and Covenants.”  Br. Harper is an associate professor of Church History and doctrine at Brigham Young University and an editor of the Joseph Smith Papers.  His presentation was so clear and well-stated on the subject that I immediately went and purchased the book compiled from the presentations called The Doctrine and Covenants: Revelations in Context.

In the next few posts I hope to be able to draw from Br. Harper’s paper on the subject, as well as other statements from apostles and prophets, so that we may come to a better understanding of what the law of consecration is, and what it is not.  Elder Maxwell noted in his April 2002 Conference address that “many ignore consecration . . . the conscientious among us, however, experience divine discontent”.  The word discontent means a restless longing for something better than the present situation.  That feeling surely comes because we know there is something more we could do with regard to consecration, yet we don’t know what it is or how to do it.  Br. Harper writes his purpose, and mine, “to help conscientious Saints understand and live the law of consecration as it is embodied in present-day Church practices”.

Br. Harper and other historians have classified the quotations and the common points at the beginning of this post a “folk memory”.  According to my wife who is a folklorist, a folk memory is a communal belief passed on through generations, usually orally, and because of this longevity the truth of the idea may not be questioned.  As Harper, Nibley, and many others have noted about the folk memory of the law of consecration, “No matter how widely believed it is, that is not the law of consecration contained in the Doctrine and Covenants”.

Probably the first thing that we must understand about the law of consecration is that it is still binding on the Latter-day Saints today.  For those members who have attended the temple, this should come as no surprise.  One of the covenants that we enter into in that sacred edifice is the law of consecration.  We covenant and promise to live this law – not that it was once lived, not that we are “willing” to live it, or that some day we will live it – but that we will live it, and now.  It is as binding upon us today as every other covenant we enter into in the holy temple.  We can, and should, live the law of consecration today, and I believe that many Saints are living it.  For those who have the “folk memory” belief, like I did, and are erroneously awaiting the prophet to announce something in this regard, hopefully some of these things we’ll share here will allow each of us to better understand this subject and consecrate ourselves to the Lord and his kingdom as we have covenanted to do.

In 1996 President Hinckley taught the following at a Logan Temple Workers Devotional:

Without the spirit of dedication, without the spirit of sacrifice, without the spirit of consecration, temples could not function. That goes without saying. The work in the temple is essential, it is a work of personal sacrifice and individual consecration. . . . the law of sacrifice and the law of consecration were not done away with and are still in effect. 

Br. Harper comments on President Hinckley remarks:

No revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants rescind, suspend, or revoke the law of consecration. . . . The law, in other words, was revealed to Joseph Smith in February 1831, but the law itself simply has been, is, and ever will be.  Consecration is the law of the celestial kingdom, and section 78 teaches that no one will receive an inheritance there who has not obeyed the law (see D&C 78:7). 

At the annual banquet of the FARMS organization at BYU on September 27, 1991, Elder Maxwell taught “a word about consecration”:

You will recall the episode in the fifth chapter of the book of Acts about how Ananias and Sapphira “kept back part” of the monetary proceeds from their possessions (Acts 5:3). . . . there are so many ways of keeping back part, and so many things we can withhold a portion of besides property.  All things really ought to be put on the altar.

This holding back may occur even after one’s having given a great deal, as likely had Ananias and Sapphira.  Having done much, we may mistakenly think that surely it is all right to hold back a remaining part.  Obviously, there can be no total submissiveness when this occurs.

Some are undoubtedly asking, but how do I live the law today? How do I give my all my possessions to the Church?  What program has the Church instituted to allow for the Saints’ consecration?  We’re not living the United Order today, are we?  It is these questions and more that we hope to help answer, including clarifying the mistaken premises upon which they are asked.

In the next part of the series we will define what the law of consecration is, and what the United Order is, for much of the confusion comes by conflating the two.  The law of consecration is not the United Order, and the United Order is not the law of consecration.

(Continued in Part 2)

Living the Law of Consecration – Part 1: The Mythic “Folk Memory”

Detail from The Temptation by William Strang. 1899. Oil on canvas. Tate Gallery.

The account of the Fall of Adam and Eve in the Bible is relatively succinct, particularly in the vocal exchanges between the serpent, Eve, and Adam (bolded below).  What details we know of the Fall come primarily from chapter 3 of Genesis:

1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. (Gen. 3:1-7)

Some Armenian Apocrypha manuscripts have been translated into English in recent decades which expand on the Fall narrative substantially, and which are enlightening to compare and contrast with the Genesis account and the account as presented in the temple.  LDS scholars John Tvedtnes and Matthew Roper have helped bring this literature to light for us.  English translations of the Armenian Apocrypha texts can be found by W. Lowndes Lipscomb and Michael Stone.  Michael Stone’s book Armenian Apocrypha Relating to Adam and Eve is available for limited reading on Google Books.

I would like to compare what is presented about the Fall in the Armenian Apocrypha with what is known in the Genesis account, particularly the additional details which are absent from the Bible. Any comparisons with the temple account will be left for the reader to make.  The part of the apocrypha that we will look at has been called Adam and Eve and the Incarnation, and as noted by Stone “was composed in Armenian, incorporating ancient traditions originating both within and outside Armenian literature”.

One of the first things I notice in paragraph 2 of the Armenian texts is that the serpent is clearly identified with Satan, which is not explicit in Genesis.  One of the manuscripts reads:

The evil one, Satan, . . . having entered into the belly of the serpent, he spoke to Eve with human voice, and he said to Eve, “Why is it that you do not eat of the fruit of that tree?”

In another manuscript, Satan calls the fruit “beautiful.”  In all manuscripts, Satan refers specifically to “that tree” or “this fruit,” whereas in Genesis the question is more general, “hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” (Gen. 3:1).  Eve responds by telling Satan of the commandment as given to them by God.  Satan then replies, in one of the manuscripts:

But the serpent said, “(That is) not so!  Because God himself was a man like you when he ate of it, and he became God of all.  Because of that he said not to eat of that, because you knew that when you eat of it, you will become a god, his equal.  Because of that he said for you not to eat.”

This is substantially different than the Genesis account.  In Genesis, the partaking of the fruit is noted by Satan as causing eyes to be opened, and that they would become “as gods,” by “knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3:5).  In this apocryphal account Satan goes further to note that God was once a man too, and that He became God by eating of the fruit, and thus became divine.  If Adam and Eve partake of it they will become like Him, or “his equal.”  Stone also notes here that text is explicit “that God was himself originally human and became divine through eating the fruit”.  These are interesting details to consider, for even though it is Satan who speaks, there is both truth and error in his words to Eve (see Gen. 3:22).

After hearing this, Eve partakes of the fruit, and is stripped of her light or glory.  At this point the Armenian text embellishes the story significantly from what is contained in the Genesis account.  In Genesis it is only noted that Eve “gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat” (Gen. 3:6).  But what was the interchange between Eve and Adam?  Did Adam say anything to Eve on the occasion?  Did Adam protest at all?  What did Eve say?  How did Eve convince Adam to partake?  These details are strangely absent from the Genesis account, and there is no account of any conversation there.

The Armenian texts provide further details, including a conversation between Adam and Eve.  One of the manuscripts says:

When she came to Adam and he saw and said, “Why is it that you have been stripped naked? Did you eat of that fruit?”  Eve said, “O Adam, take (it) and eat!”  Adam said, “I fear (lest) I become stripped naked like you.”

In other words, upon recognizing what Eve has done, Adam immediately interrogates Eve with questions of what she has done, why she is stripped, and if she has eaten of the fruit of the forbidden tree.  Eve only wants Adam to also eat of the fruit.  Adam protests doing it, for he knows that he too will be stripped of his glory.

Eve responds that Adam is beloved of God, and might not be angry with him.  John Tvedtnes notes that Adam says “I cannot taste it and become like you”.  Eve invites Adam to partake again.  Tvedtnes also notes in one translation that Eve tells Adam that “This fruit is extremely sweet and tasty”.  Adam holds the fruit in his hand, and ponders eating the fruit for some time (in one account three hours).  One manuscript relates Adam’s thoughts: “If I do not eat, I shall be separated from my wife”.  In another manuscript Eve also echos similar words:

Do not forget me and do not separate me from you, and do not abandon me in this nakedness of mine.  Take (it) and eat and because of love of you, God will turn and have mercy upon us.

Adam considers the consequences and partakes:

“It is preferable to die with the woman than to be separated from her.“  He took and consumed the fruit, and was stripped naked of the light.

And so we see that the Armenian text adds quite a bit of detail to the story of the Fall of Adam and Eve, much of which is not present in the Genesis account.

The Fall of Adam and Eve in the Armenian Aprocrypha

New Mormon.org Homepage

Check out the new Mormon.org website that was launched today.  It is very clean and well designed, a big improvement over the former website.  A great new feature of the site that I’m sure will be used a lot is that visitors from anywhere in the world will be able to chat live with missionaries online at any time of the day.

www.Mormon.org

[via NorthTemple.com]

New Mormon.org Website

Satellite photo of the San Diego California Temple with the "Seal of Melchizedek" overlayed 13 times. I particularly like the symbol used in the skylight of the atrium in the center of the temple.

(Continued from Part 3)

To continue my research I wanted to know as accurately as possible the story about this symbol, the “seal of Melchizedek,” as it was used in the San Diego Temple.  I couldn’t find a good account online, so I decided to go to the source.  Who better would know than the design architect of the temple?  So I gave him a call. 

His name is William “Bill” S. Lewis Jr., and he is a member of the Church and a current sealer at the San Diego Temple.  He graduated from the University of Southern California in 1953 with a degree in architecture, was a co-owner of an architectural firm in San Diego for a number of years, and he has been involved with many architectural projects in the San Diego area.  I’m sure he counts his design work on the temple as one of his most cherished experiences.  He retired in 1990, after a 41-year career.  See the footnotes for a little more background about Br. Lewis .  He was very cordial on the phone, and gave me the courtesy of about a twenty minute phone call.  The story he told me was intriguing, and I thought it would be good to document it.

He said that the architects were given quite a lot of freedom on the design of this particular temple, and it was not dictated by the Church’s building department as other temples have been.  This freedom was granted expressly by President Hinckley.

He said they were working hard to find a common symbol, module, or pattern to give continuity to the design, or to give a certain character to the temple.  They started with a square, but they thought that was too plain and boxy.  Then they started chamfering the square’s corners which brought it to an 8-sided figure.  When they extended the lines it became two overlapping squares.  They thought that would work well and so they started using it more and more in the design of the temple.  He said that the more they used it the better and better it worked.  Some people asked about the symbolism of the design, and he told them he didn’t know if it had any particular symbolism.  He said that they put a circle in the middle, which he thought could have stood for the sun or the Celestial Kingdom.  He said that they used it many thousands of times all throughout the design of the temple – in the doors, fencing, exterior, interior, trimwork, floorplan, etc (see satellite photo above for the use of the symbol in the overall layout).  When the design was originally shown to the General Authorities in Salt Lake they had sun stones, moon stones, and star stones on the exterior of the temple too (mirroring the Salt Lake and Nauvoo Temples), but the Brethren notified them that these symbols shouldn’t be used.  So they removed these symbols, but they didn’t say anything about the interlocking squares symbol.

Once the temple was finished, Elder David B. Haight of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles escorted the media through the temple, as they are some of the first that get to go through.  Someone from the media asked him what the symbol was, and what it represented, and Elder Haight was taken a little off-guard by that question.  He said that it was probably just an architectural detail.

Br. Lewis said that a good friend of his, Stan Smith, who has been a regional representative, and was the project representative on the temple, was taking photos all the time during the construction of the temple.  But this particular symbol bugged him for some reason.  He took the photos he had down to the Church Historian’s Office in Salt Lake City and asked if they knew anything about it.  They didn’t.  But they suggested that he take them down to Hugh Nibley at BYU who might know something about it.  So Br. Smith made an appointment with Br. Nibley, and sat down with him in his office and asked him if this symbol had a name.  Nibley said something like, “Oh sure, it is the seal of King Melchizedek.” He also indicated that it was a symbol of Melchizedek’s power, kingdom, and as a type of name of Melchizedek, like a seal in wax.

Stan Smith called Br. Lewis to tell him the good news, and was quite excited about it.  Br. Lewis wanted to verify it himself, so he made an appointment with Nibley too.  Nibley verified it with Lewis as well, after which they had an extensive conversation about all things temples, Greek, Roman, Egyptian, etc., with Nibley in typical fashion referring to all three in the same sentence.

Br. Lewis said that President Hinckley would probably be interested to know this detail about the symbol, since he had met with the architects 4 times throughout the design of this temple, which was extremely unusual.  So Lewis wrote a letter to President Hinckley, who Lewis said also verified it with Nibley.

Since then Br. Lewis has seen the same symbol used on the Newport Beach Temple, and also in several places in the Salt Lake Temple (like the door patrons enter with a beehive in the center), and he supposes that we will see it more and more as time goes on.  But he was pleasantly surprised to have found out such an interesting detail about the symbol that he used throughout the San Diego Temple.  He has been asked to speak hundreds of times about the design of the San Diego Temple in firesides and other occasions.  He said a couple years ago he was asked to speak at an event of the Fine Arts Department at BYU about it, but wasn’t sure of the details of the occasion.

It is doubtful that there is a transcription anywhere of this story, so I took as many details down as I could on our phone conversation.  Thanks to Br. Lewis for telling us this great story.

(To be continued…)

The Seal of Melchizedek – Part 4

Margaret Barker Interview – Part 7b (Temple in the Modern World)

Margaret Barker Interview – Part 7a (Location of the Temple)

“So we know that somebody thought it was you are seeing the face of the Lord. Yea. Very interesting, very interesting. So someone has been at work, changing the docs, and we know which way.”  --Margaret Barker

“I think Melchizedek was a theophany of Yahweh. The Jewish interpretation, certainly the next passage, … Yahweh is the great high priest, and he is the one, as you have in the temple, you know, the great high priest is Yahweh, and he is the priest to God Most High. So you’ve got a hierarchy of priests. And I think that is how Genesis 15 was interpreted. Where, in the Apocalypse of Abraham, Abraham sees, mostly clearly, Melchizedek, but he describes him as … the angel Yahweh, and he is dressed as a high priest, with his purple and his… turban thing, and yes, it’s all very very interesting… all the other earlier sources… Melchizedek is the priest of El Elyon, almost certainly Yahweh, part of the great angel hierarchy. I mean, the implications of that for Melchizedek priesthood, is just mind boggling, absolutely mind boggling… So there is a lot of work for people to do, waiting to be done. Oh dear, it would be nice if we didn’t need sleep. We’d get such a lot more done!”  --Margaret Barker

Margaret Barker Interview – Part 6 (Seeing the Face of God)

“A single parent is actually a contradiction in terms.  What you’ve actually got is an abandonment.  But you’re not allowed to say that.  Because it is usually the mum who is bringing up the child.”  --Margaret Barker

“The image of God.  That is what we were created in, isn’t it?  … That is the basis of human dignity.  And if you deny that image in yourself, you are denying the most precious thing.  If you say, I am no more than the skin and bones, … you’d have lost the most important thing of all.  … I don’t know if you have this in America, but in magazines you have all this ‘Let’s give you a new image!’ You know, and you have your hair dyed and plastic surgery, and all the rest of it.  You don’t need a new image!  You know, we’ve got the greatest image already, but most people don’t know that.  You are the image of God… and that defines your rights and your responsibilities.”  --Margaret Barker

Margaret Barker Interview – Part 5 (Social Implications)