Mormon Temple Ceremony & Masonry?
The relationship between the Mormon temple ceremony and Masonry is to close to call a coincidence. Both Masons and Mormons both include the 5 points of fellowship. The keys, signs and penalties are the same, why is that? J. Smith claimed that the temple ceremony was given to him by God. The rituals that go on every day in all the LDS temples through out the world make promises that are so foreign to people that it most certainly should make them pause.
As for the temple rituals, they have been altered a couple of times in the LDS history. Please read: Ebenezer Robinson, who had been the editor of the Times and Seasons, made this statement concerning the original endowment ritual: "Here was ins***uted, undoubtedly the order of things which represented the scenes in the Garden of Eden, which was called in Nauvoo, the 'Holy Order,' a secret organization. The terrible oaths and covenants taken by those who entered there were known only to those who took them, as one of the members said to me, 'I could tell you many things, but if I should, my life would pay the forfeiture' " (The Return, vol. 2, pp. 346-48, typed copy, p. 153).
These oaths have been greatly modified since Joseph Smith's time. The changes were probably made within the last sixty years. Below are comparisons of the oaths as they were published in Temple Mormonism in 1931 with the way they are given today. The first oath we will deal with was printed as follows in 1931:
We, and each of us, covenant and promise that we will not reveal any of the secrets of this, the first token of the Aaronic priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign or penalty. Should we do so; we agree that our throats be cut from ear to ear and our tongues torn out by their roots (Temple Mormonism, p. 18).
This oath has been changed to:
I, —— (think of the new name) do covenant and promise that I will never reveal the First Token of the Aaronic Priesthood, together with its accompanying name, sign and penalty. Rather than do so I would suffer my life to be taken (Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? p. 468).
The second oath was printed as follows by Paden in 1931:
We and each of us do covenant and promise that we will not reveal the secrets of this, the Second Token of the Aaroni
Priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign, grip or penalty. Should we do so, we agree to have our breasts cut open and our hearts and vitals torn from our bodies and given to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field (Temple Mormonism, p. 20).
This has been softened to:
I, —— (think of the first given name), do covenant and promise that I will never reveal the second token of the Aaronic Priesthood, together with its accompanying name, sign and penalty. Rather than do so I would suffer my life to be taken (Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? p. 470).
The third oath, as printed in Temple Mormonism, p. 20, read:
We and each of us do covenant and promise that we will not reveal any of the secrets of this, the First Token of the Melchizedek Priesthood, with its accompanying name, sign or penalty. Should we do so, we agree that our bodies be cut asunder in the midst and all our bowels gush out.
This oath now states:
I covenant in the name of the Son that I will never reveal the first token of the Melchizedek Priesthood or sign of the nail, with its accompanying name, sign or penalty. Rather than do so I would suffer my life to be taken.
Although the oaths are no longer as crude as they used to be, Mormons who go through the temple still draw the thumb across the throat, stomach, etc., as they take these oaths and are told that "The representation of the penalties indicates different ways in which life may be taken (Mormonism—Shadow or Reality? p. 468).
To the early Mormon people these oaths were a very serious matter. In a discourse delivered December 13, 1857, Heber C. Kimball, a member of the First Presidency, declared: "Judas lost that saving principle, and they took him and killed him.... they actually kicked him until his bowels came out.
" 'I will suffer my bowels to be taken out before I will forfeit the covenant I have made with Him and my brethren.' Do you understand me? ... I know the day is right at hand when men will forfeit their Priesthood and turn against the covenants they have made, and they will be destroyed as Judas was" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, pp. 125-26).
A person can only begin to imagine how serious these oaths must have been to the Mormon people when the doctrine of "Blood Atonement" was practiced. Now that the oaths have been modified and the practice of "Blood Atonement" abandoned, the Mormon leaders do not have as much control over their people
One of the oaths which was formerly taken in the temple ritual was the source of so much trouble that the Mormon leaders finally removed it entirely from the ceremony. This oath was printed in Temple Mormonism, page 21, as follows: "You and each of you do solemnly promise and vow that you will pray, and never cease to pray, and never cease to importune high heaven to avenge the blood of the prophets on this nation, and that you will teach this to your children and your children's children unto the third and fourth generation."
A great deal of testimony has been given concerning this oath, and although all of the witnesses did not agree as to its exact wording, there can be little doubt that such an oath was administered to the Mormon people after Joseph Smith's death. John D. Lee related that the following occurred after Joseph Smith's death:
... Brigham raised his hand and said, "I swear by the eternal Heavens that I have unsheathed my sword, and I will never return it until the blood of the Prophet Joseph and Hyrum, and those who were slain in Missouri, is avenged. This whole nation is guilty of shedding their blood, by ***enting to the deed, and holding its peace." ... Furthermore, every one who had p***ed through their endowments, in the Temple, were placed under the most sacred obligations to avenge the blood of the Prophet, whenever an opportunity offered, and to teach their children to do the same, thus making the entire Mormon people sworn and avowed enemies of the American nation (The Confessions of John D. Lee, p. 160).
Some Mormon apologists have maintained that there was no "oath of vengeance" in the temple ceremony, but the "Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon" makes it very plain that there was such an oath. Under the date of December 6, 1889, Apostle Cannon recorded the following in his diary:
About 4:30 p.m. this meeting adjourned and was followed by a meeting of Presidents Woodruff, Cannon and Smith and Bros. Lyman and Grant.... In speaking of the recent examination before Judge Anderson Father said that he understood when he had his endowments in Nauvoo that he took an oath against the murderers of the Prophet Joseph as well as other prophets, and if he had ever met any of those who had taken a hand in that m***acre he would undoubtedly have attempted to avenge the blood of the martyrs ("Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon," December 6, 1889, pp. 205-206).
As one can see, changes were made to a ritual that Smith claimed was given to him by God. Why is there such a similarity between the LDS temple rituals and Masonry? Making these blood oaths are they good and right? How can these rituals give anyone peace? Being sworn to keep these rituals secret, and vowing to have your life taken if you divulge them, how is that peaceful? How do these rituals teach anyone about God other then He is more then willing to kill you. I am sorry that some who attend the LDS temple can't see clearly for this ritual is not God ordained but was created by man.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by neverending
