Temple changes

[Lizzy60]

Bride [wife, woman, church] Bridegroom [husband, man, Christ].

Throughout the scriptures, Christ is referred to as the Bridegroom, and the Church is His Bride. The temple endowment covenant of obedience reflects this relationship. A wife submits herself and obeys her husband, as long as he is acting as Christ would, just as we understand that the body of the Church submits itself to Christ. It is His Church and His Kingdom, not ours.

This is what we have lost in the new endowment language, and in the new sealing language. We have obscured the precious Bridegroom and Bride symbolism.

The modern-day embracing of feminism has cost us dearly.

[passionflower]

This isn't about change feeling a little unsettling or different. Robin Hood is not a child who can't handle a bit of change to his routine. This goes much deeper than that.

Essential doctrine has been removed from the temple endowment. The true relationship between Adam, Eve, and God is no longer taught in the temple. The Law of obedience has been changed. And we have seen no revelation to indicate why this has happened. Nothing to explain how every prophet from Adam to Monson got this wrong. It really appears to have been done for reasons of political correctness and convenience.

I have not heard anyone voice this opinion out loud. Everyone I have spoken with has either been positive about the changes, or have been indifferent to them. Yet all of the positive comments have been of the superficial variety. It is shorter. You don't have to change as much. It is easier. I never liked having to veil my face. My step mother even said that she is glad she no longer has to obey her husband (in a joking way).

This change flies in the face of scripture and past revelation. It cannot be explained as a "line upon line" change as I have seen many try and do. It is removing lines, not building upon them. And it is replacing those lines with something false. Something that is rooted in modern feminist ideaology and not God. The world has long taught that Eve does not need Adam, and here we are now implementing that same idea into our temple covenants.

It is regrettable to me that this has happened. I understand Robin Hood's feelings. I will continue to attend the temple as I believe in essential nature of those covenants. But it is with much sadness and regret that I see us as a Church and people moving farther from God and closer to the World. My children will never be able to covenant to keep the true Law of obedience.

I really appreciate most of the changes the Church has made w/ regards to organization. Putting the Melchizedek priesthood quorums together under the person with keys was long overdue. We are getting much more in line with the scriptures and past revelation in an organizational sense. But, in my opinion, we are continuing to move away from God and closer to the world in matters of doctrine.

Apparently some people are not as sensitive to certain things as others are. If you didn't like your new temple endowment experience, you are wondered at, demeaned, minimized, your experience is attributed to the devil or blamed on yourself, or you are outright criticized. They just plain don't understand.

I also attended the temple with a positive attitude. My DH told me there were some things he thought I would like about it, and I did. . However, like a few others here, while in the endowment room, I had a very bad feeling come over me to the point of becoming quite upset and anxious to get done with the session.

In the CR room I sat down with my DH and told him how miserable and upset this was to me and why. I went on for almost an hour about it, and my negative observations were many and deep. I really can't lay them all out here, but Serragon, you brought up some of it, but I went deeper and broader concerning the sweeping under the carpet of the Patriarchal Order.

As I talked, somehow a good feeling came over me, and I am not the type who just feels better because I "vented" something out. Nevertheless, as I continued to explain to my DH what I thought was absolutely WRONG here and why, that good feeling kept coming more and more. It wasn't too long before a wonderful sensation burned from my bosom and enveloped me. I felt happy, even joyful, and completely at peace. I knew I wasn't essentially in the wrong here, as I felt so reassured, comforted, and even loved. A feeling of peace stayed with me for the remainder of the day.

And no I haven't changed my mind about the temple endowment, sealing and initiatory being just screwed. But most of the church members are going for this, love it, you can read that right here, and some who haven't attended the temple in years ( because they believed the ceremonies were demeaning to women ) are now attending full board. There is rejoicing from large LDS feminist and homosexual groups and their supporters and sympathizers. Now by all accounts the young people think their temple experience is great who might not have before.

Seems like the new temple endowment, etc, was a success on nearly all fronts and mission accomplished. Looks like what was done is what it took to keep the church moving forward. And it is really no secret out of school that President Nelson has every right to make these changes, even in the covenants. Being President of the High Priesthood is a huge big deal encompassing authority and privilege.

Doesn't mean I like it, though. I know I have to support this, but it is quite a trial and an unhappy sacrifice to do so. I would say that important and true things that are eternal and of good report and praiseworthy were ripped from me that day. And I would surely like to know what any of these changes had to do with the dead we are really supposed to be there for in the first place? How in the name of God's creations did any of these changes help them?

[passionflower]

This isn't about change feeling a little unsettling or different. Robin Hood is not a child who can't handle a bit of change to his routine. This goes much deeper than that.

Essential doctrine has been removed from the temple endowment. The true relationship between Adam, Eve, and God is no longer taught in the temple. The Law of obedience has been changed. And we have seen no revelation to indicate why this has happened. Nothing to explain how every prophet from Adam to Monson got this wrong. It really appears to have been done for reasons of political correctness and convenience.

I have not heard anyone voice this opinion out loud. Everyone I have spoken with has either been positive about the changes, or have been indifferent to them. Yet all of the positive comments have been of the superficial variety. It is shorter. You don't have to change as much. It is easier. I never liked having to veil my face. My step mother even said that she is glad she no longer has to obey her husband (in a joking way).

This change flies in the face of scripture and past revelation. It cannot be explained as a "line upon line" change as I have seen many try and do. It is removing lines, not building upon them. And it is replacing those lines with something false. Something that is rooted in modern feminist ideaology and not God. The world has long taught that Eve does not need Adam, and here we are now implementing that same idea into our temple covenants.

It is regrettable to me that this has happened. I understand Robin Hood's feelings. I will continue to attend the temple as I believe in essential nature of those covenants. But it is with much sadness and regret that I see us as a Church and people moving farther from God and closer to the World. My children will never be able to covenant to keep the true Law of obedience.

I really appreciate most of the changes the Church has made w/ regards to organization. Putting the Melchizedek priesthood quorums together under the person with keys was long overdue. We are getting much more in line with the scriptures and past revelation in an organizational sense. But, in my opinion, we are continuing to move away from God and closer to the world in matters of doctrine.

.

[EmmaLee]

I see two groups that are happy or content with the changes. The feminists, both men and women, along with the pro-gay-marriage people, are happy. Some of them are actually thrilled.

There is another group that is thrilled with the temple changes, and that is the Snuffer disciples. Reading through a couple of their blogs and online groups, and without exception (that I've seen), they are very happy about the recent changes. But then, almost all of them fall into the other two groups you mentioned, as well, so maybe the Snufferites aren't actually a 3rd group, but a sub-group of the other two. Strange bedfellows - feminists, pro-same-sex-marriage, Snufferites, and the-leaders-are-infallible folks - all pleased with the recent temple changes. Fascinating times we live in, to be sure!

[EmmaLee]

And I would surely like to know what any of these changes had to do with the dead we are really supposed to be there for in the first place? How in the name of God's creations did any of these changes help them?

Good questions.

[passionflower]

Or maybe the endowment never came from God and is a ritual that dates back to the 1400's through the Masons.

Is that what you believe?

It's a fact, there's nothing to believe. Don't make me post a pic from a 1930's Masonic temple ritual. Joseph Smith hadn't been a 33rd degree Mason 3 months before instituting the temple endowment. His Father, Joseph Smith, Sr. was a Mason too. This is stuff you're never gonna hear or be taught at church, that's for sure. The truth hurts sometimes and I'm just the messenger. But don't take my word for it, research it for yourself.

Am I supposed to be hurting over this? Why? I find it rather cool. I would love to research it myself. How fun. I already know the JS quote, " I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves" is Masonic. That's a pretty good saying. I like a lot of Mason stuff.

[mirkwood]

feminists, pro-same-sex-marriage, Snufferites, and the-leaders-are-infallible folks

There are a great many of us who fall into none of those groups and have no problem with the changes.

[EmmaLee]

feminists, pro-same-sex-marriage, Snufferites, and the-leaders-are-infallible folks

There are a great many of us who fall into none of those groups and have no problem with the changes.

Could be, I suppose, although I haven't met even one yet (in real life, as opposed to on LDSFF). Is there any change the leaders could make to the temple and the work that happens inside that you can ever see yourself disagreeing with? Sincere question.

[drtanner]

Strange how everyone consistently is getting directly opposite "Revelation" on this topic. (Strange, this happens on every topic now that I think about it)

It's almost as if there is an incorrect understand of what Revelation is, how it's received, what it "feels" like. Hmmm.

All is well.. all is well.

I don't think it's strange we get different personal revelation. Not everyone who prays to know the truth about which religion to join, joins ours.

I also think that even when something is right, it can trigger an emotional reaction in us. Did I think the temple was "wrong" before? No. But I do think some cultural traditions had made their way in, and they weren't necessary and were even getting in the way of understanding the will of God. So our Heavenly father asked our prophet to remove them so they weren't a stumbling block to learning his true will for us.

The church doesn't cave to social pressure, or it would be a whole lot different than it is now. Feminists and homosexuals aren't exactly running to join us.

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

[Contemplator]

This isn't about change feeling a little unsettling or different. Robin Hood is not a child who can't handle a bit of change to his routine. This goes much deeper than that.

Essential doctrine has been removed from the temple endowment. The true relationship between Adam, Eve, and God is no longer taught in the temple. The Law of obedience has been changed. And we have seen no revelation to indicate why this has happened. Nothing to explain how every prophet from Adam to Monson got this wrong. It really appears to have been done for reasons of political correctness and convenience.

I have not heard anyone voice this opinion out loud. Everyone I have spoken with has either been positive about the changes, or have been indifferent to them. Yet all of the positive comments have been of the superficial variety. It is shorter. You don't have to change as much. It is easier. I never liked having to veil my face. My step mother even said that she is glad she no longer has to obey her husband (in a joking way).

This change flies in the face of scripture and past revelation. It cannot be explained as a "line upon line" change as I have seen many try and do. It is removing lines, not building upon them. And it is replacing those lines with something false. Something that is rooted in modern feminist ideaology and not God. The world has long taught that Eve does not need Adam, and here we are now implementing that same idea into our temple covenants.

It is regrettable to me that this has happened. I understand Robin Hood's feelings. I will continue to attend the temple as I believe in essential nature of those covenants. But it is with much sadness and regret that I see us as a Church and people moving farther from God and closer to the World. My children will never be able to covenant to keep the true Law of obedience.

I really appreciate most of the changes the Church has made w/ regards to organization. Putting the Melchizedek priesthood quorums together under the person with keys was long overdue. We are getting much more in line with the scriptures and past revelation in an organizational sense. But, in my opinion, we are continuing to move away from God and closer to the world in matters of doctrine.

I am sympathetic to what you are saying. A new idea occurred to me, though. We used to have a version of obedience that was consistent with Ephesians 5:

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

Implicit in these verses are two ideas:
1. A man should obey God
2. A woman should submit to her husband when he is like Christ.

Christ did nothing but what the father asked. Why are we willing to submit to Christ? Because we can learn from experience that He asks of us nothing but what the father asks. If he ever deviated, we would be under no obligation to follow Jesus any longer. Thus, implicit in the two aspects of obedience in Ephesians 5 is that the wife needs to know God's will well enough to be able to know if her husband is speaking the Father's words. If her husband speaks anything other than the Father's words, then the wife is under no obligation.

So, we actually have 3 items in the previous version (again, based upon Ephesians 5):
1. A man should obey God
2. A woman should obey God well enough to know when her husband is like Christ.
3. A woman should submit to her husband when he is like Christ.

Notice that item 3 in this list was not explicit, but it was logically necessary for a woman to keep her part of the agreement. A correct idea does not have to be explicitly stated in the temple ceremony to be a correct idea. I recently wondered if there is actually fourth part of this that had not yet been explicitly included in the temple ceremony. Maybe I am expected to give head to my wife when she is like Christ (that is, hearing the words of the Father and speaking them). A good example would be the wife of the mission president who had the dream that kept the missionaries safe. Her husband was wise to hearken to her counsel.

So, maybe there are actually four parts to a married couple being obedient:
1. A man should obey God
2. A woman should obey God well enough to know when her husband is like Christ.
3. A woman should submit to her husband when he is like Christ.
4. A man should submit to his wife when she is like Christ.

It turns out that numbers 1 and 2 are now in the endowment and 3 and 4 are in the sealing. It is possible that no doctrine has been changed or lost. It has merely been improved in its presentation.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. You are attempting to look at the changes as though directed from heaven and assessing what we might be needing to learn from them. To me, this is a very valid enterprise and position to explore. it is possible that this is the correct path and I am in the wrong.

But I look at your addition of #4 and see the fruits of changing doctrine already appearing. Because there is no scriptural justification or actual revelation, we are left with speculation and begin adding things to our doctrine that simply aren't true. We are rapidly losing our knowledge of the true relationship between Man/Woman/God as taught through the creation. And that knowledge is being replaced with a worldly knowledge that untrue. Your 4 parts above could be simply stated as "A Person should obey God". There are deeper truths being lost because some people are uncomfortable with them.

It seems to me that we are becoming the church of self-esteem instead of the church of truth. Which will bring people closer to God in the end?

Serragon,

I appreciate your response. Though, I think you mischaracterize my intention. My real intention is to recognize that what you were familiar with last year, that is now changed, is also significantly changed from the presentation before 1991. That one was also quite different from the way it was presented in the early 1900s. That way was also different from the presentation in Nauvoo, whether in the temple or in the upper room of the red brick store.

This change is not a signal of some new falling away. If change were a signal of falling away then we were doomed long ago. I have attended the temple before and after the changes around 1990 or 91, and also this year. I have been able to learn and be inspired at each point in time, regardless of the changes. Some of my favorite symbols disappeared in 1991. Those are lost to us now. Yet, the core message of how to engage in conversation with God is still there. The elements that seem to have endured changes are the existence of symbolic washing, anointing and clothing, as well as tokens, names, and signs. The basic dramatic setting has also been a part of the presentation from the very beginning. Details of the presentation have changed.

So, either we have been lost since the very first changes or all of the versions are fine vehicles for us to receive revelation. Since I have learned through the Spirit and been drawn closer to God through each version where I have participated, I choose the view that the presentation is not the endowment. The endowment is not the symbols but the eternal meaning beyond the symbols. As Elder Widtsoe pointed out in the early 1900s, you can experience every element of the temple and not be endowed. Until you have seen the eternal realities beyond the symbols you have not been endowed as you should.

Please understand that I honor your views and the experiences of those who do not connect with the temple ordinances. I only offer my experience as a way of saying that there is no clear answer here. We are all left trying to connect with God and return to Him. The temple has been helpful to me. Others may find other mechanisms more helpful. I think that is why Joseph tried direct teaching, like Lectures on Faith, and symbolic presentations, like the temple ordinances, and scriptural accounts, like the Book of Mormon. Whichever works for you, the message is the same. Heaven is open and God would like to have you approach Him and enter into conversation. He wants us to be able to return to God's presence.

[Alaris]

Strange how everyone consistently is getting directly opposite "Revelation" on this topic. (Strange, this happens on every topic now that I think about it)

It's almost as if there is an incorrect understand of what Revelation is, how it's received, what it "feels" like. Hmmm.

All is well.. all is well.

I don't think it's strange we get different personal revelation. Not everyone who prays to know the truth about which religion to join, joins ours.

I also think that even when something is right, it can trigger an emotional reaction in us. Did I think the temple was "wrong" before? No. But I do think some cultural traditions had made their way in, and they weren't necessary and were even getting in the way of understanding the will of God. So our Heavenly father asked our prophet to remove them so they weren't a stumbling block to learning his true will for us.

The church doesn't cave to social pressure, or it would be a whole lot different than it is now. Feminists and homosexuals aren't exactly running to join us.

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

Great post drtanner, and I agree with but then again that first olive branch came after the world's population had just been wiped off the face of the earth. There is a hard cut off at some point where the doors close where those left outside had plenty of time to get their lamps filled and wicks trimmed.

Jesus teaches us to doubt not but be believing. To seek. Those who say "we have enough" will eventually be encircled about by the chains of hell. I suspect those who are having a darkness experience in the temple have gone in with tremendously low expectations which is quite the opposite of faith. Doubt.

[dezNatDefender]

I don't think it's strange we get different personal revelation. Not everyone who prays to know the truth about which religion to join, joins ours.

I also think that even when something is right, it can trigger an emotional reaction in us. Did I think the temple was "wrong" before? No. But I do think some cultural traditions had made their way in, and they weren't necessary and were even getting in the way of understanding the will of God. So our Heavenly father asked our prophet to remove them so they weren't a stumbling block to learning his true will for us.

The church doesn't cave to social pressure, or it would be a whole lot different than it is now. Feminists and homosexuals aren't exactly running to join us.

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

I suspect those who are having a darkness experience in the temple have gone in with tremendously low expectations which is quite the opposite of faith. Doubt.

What a horrible thing to say about fellow Saints..

It's not me-it's you. I can just as easily say, the only thing that would lead one to make such a ridiculous statement is to protect their own fragile faith.

If someone who DID have high expectations and they DID have a darkness experience it means there is cognitive dissonance going on. In order to protect your own spirituality, you MUST blame others who experience a darkness as a lack in THEIR faith. Because to actually investigate, ponder, study and pray about it and the reasons as to why many faithful, church-going, former Bishops, former missionaries, etc. have experienced this would be too much. It's much easier to blame it on a "lack of faith".

[dezNatDefender]

I don't think it's strange we get different personal revelation. Not everyone who prays to know the truth about which religion to join, joins ours.

I also think that even when something is right, it can trigger an emotional reaction in us. Did I think the temple was "wrong" before? No. But I do think some cultural traditions had made their way in, and they weren't necessary and were even getting in the way of understanding the will of God. So our Heavenly father asked our prophet to remove them so they weren't a stumbling block to learning his true will for us.

The church doesn't cave to social pressure, or it would be a whole lot different than it is now. Feminists and homosexuals aren't exactly running to join us.

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

Jesus teaches us to doubt not but be believing.

Yes, but to believe in what and in who. The Church has proclaimed that former Prophets and Apostles were wrong (even though people thought they were right at the time), if former Prophets can be wrong, why is the current Prophet always right?

It doesn't make any sense . . .unless one studies the changes out in their minds, ponders them, understand the ramifications, looks at it from a Scriptural basis, reads, ponders, prays, etc. and then comes to an answer.

[drtanner]

I don't think it's strange we get different personal revelation. Not everyone who prays to know the truth about which religion to join, joins ours.

I also think that even when something is right, it can trigger an emotional reaction in us. Did I think the temple was "wrong" before? No. But I do think some cultural traditions had made their way in, and they weren't necessary and were even getting in the way of understanding the will of God. So our Heavenly father asked our prophet to remove them so they weren't a stumbling block to learning his true will for us.

The church doesn't cave to social pressure, or it would be a whole lot different than it is now. Feminists and homosexuals aren't exactly running to join us.

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

Great post drtanner, and I agree with but then again that first olive branch came after the world's population had just been wiped off the face of the earth. There is a hard cut off at some point where the doors close where those left outside had plenty of time to get their lamps filled and wicks trimmed.

Jesus teaches us to doubt not but be believing. To seek. Those who say "we have enough" will eventually be encircled about by the chains of hell. I suspect those who are having a darkness experience in the temple have gone in with tremendously low expectations which is quite the opposite of faith. Doubt.

And to clarify what I am saying, "don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree" A fish would need to evolve into a creature by the one and only master creator, the only being capable of endowing it with gifts necessary to reach the fruit at the top of the canopy. That being said, the fish can still be taught by the creator about the process that qualifies one for the transformation necessary to climb and the direction of the fruit. Let's not tell the fish he can never understand the path necessary to partake of the fruit because he hasn't transformed yet.

There is too many arguments surrounding the length of the transformation rather than the miracle of what is actually taking place.

[mirkwood]

Could be, I suppose, although I haven't met even one yet (in real life, as opposed to on LDSFF). Is there any change the leaders could make to the temple and the work that happens inside that you can ever see yourself disagreeing with? Sincere question.

Anything is possible (that is not the same as probable.)

Are the current First Presidency and Q12 out of harmony with Heavenly Father? Serious question.

I haven't met an active member of the church in real life (as opposed to on LDSFF) who has an issue with the changes.

[EmmaLee]

Could be, I suppose, although I haven't met even one yet (in real life, as opposed to on LDSFF). Is there any change the leaders could make to the temple and the work that happens inside that you can ever see yourself disagreeing with? Sincere question.

Anything is possible (that is not the same as probable.)

Are the current First Presidency and Q12 out of harmony with Heavenly Father? Serious question.

I haven't met an active member of the church in real life (as opposed to on LDSFF) who has an issue with the changes.

Anything is possible (that is not the same as probable).

Well, I guess we've established that we know different people.

[Alaris]

I don't think that the actual Power of the Holy Ghost will ever give 2 individuals contradicting answers to a simple question regarding TRUTH. Either one of them is wrong, or they are both wrong. They cannot both be right.

Jesus Christ cannot be both the Savior of the world and NOT the Savior of the world.
The Restoration of the Church can't have happened and NOT happened.
The book of Mormon can't be true and NOT true.
The changes to the temple(And the temple ceremony itself) can't be of God and NOT of God.

It's one or the other.

As far as Investigators looking into the church, that's different. I'm talking about Church members who claim they received the Holy Ghost and believe they have that companionship constantly.

There is a misunderstanding of the Doctrine of Christ(Exactly what the adversary wants) which lead to a misunderstanding of the Holy Ghost, what it means to receive it, and therefore a misunderstanding of revelation and a severe watering down of what we should expect when it comes to the gifts of the Spirit.

This would take away in my opinion from the grace of Jesus Christ and the kindness and his desire to confirm truth. This scripture I beleive helps clarify:

D&C50:24 That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day.

25 And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;

D&C 50:40 Behold, ye are little children and ye cannot bear all things now; ye must grow in grace and in the knowledge of the truth.

Claiming that people are withheld revelation about truth because they have not met the same qualifications of conversion you define for them is spiritual supremacy and creates a wedge rather than the olive leaf I see the savior extending, especially when it comes to things as important as what takes place in the house of the Lord and the truth of what is happening within its walls.

Jesus teaches us to doubt not but be believing.

Yes, but to believe in what and in who. The Church has proclaimed that former Prophets and Apostles were wrong (even though people thought they were right at the time), if former Prophets can be wrong, why is the current Prophet always right?

It doesn't make any sense . . .unless one studies the changes out in their minds, ponders them, understand the ramifications, looks at it from a Scriptural basis, reads, ponders, prays, etc. and then comes to an answer.

I'm making the point that those who go in with a spirit of doubt before they've even seen the changes.... Then they're not following the prescribed method at all. Have a look at Moronis promise.

Moroni 10:3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.
4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

Those who read the book of Mormon who have convinced themselves by their own wisdom that it's false may never receive a witness though they read book in its entirety.

[capctr]

Perhaps the changes actually merely reflect the state of the majority of the members-particularly the current generation. The ease of the way has made most overly sensitive to one thing or another; social justice has indoctrinated more than just the rising generation. Maybe(just maybe) this has led to the the body of the members having a "lesser light". Or maybe not, I don't know.
The only thing I can say for certain, is that the Temple IS a holy place, and we MUST stand there. President Nelson is God's prophet, and he recieves revelation for the world, but we also must receive revelation from God, or we will fall; without it, we will be left kicking against the pricks, and pointing out masonic links to the church, and murmuring about it's corperate nature.

[John Tavner]

Perhaps the changes actually merely reflect the state of the majority of the members-particularly the current generation. The ease of the way has made most overly sensitive to one thing or another; social justice has indoctrinated more than just the rising generation. Maybe(just maybe) this has led to the the body of the members having a "lesser light". Or maybe not, I don't know.
The only thing I can say for certain, is that the Temple IS a holy place, and we MUST stand there. President Nelson is God's prophet, and he recieves revelation for the world, but we also must receive revelation from God, or we will fall; without it, we will be left kicking against the pricks, and pointing out masonic links to the church, and murmuring about it's corperate nature.

The temple is only as holy as we make it. We (us as individuals) are to be temples Holy. Standing in HOly places is us being holy. We can determine what remains in "our house" we can not prevent perversion from entering into the temples as they are now. So standing in HOly places is being Holy, not going to the temple. The temple may help certain people to be Holy, but it in and of itself is not holy, not until God HImself thus so declares - a dedication does not make something holy. For instance how many people enter into the temple unworthily each day? Each week? Each month? What does worthiness mean? Worthy for what? Our Goal is to be holy enough to stand inthe presence of God. This is done by becoming, not only by doing. Too many people do, but aren't worthy. The pharisees "did" but unless we are more righteous than them we will not sit with Abraham and the Fathers. Being HOly is being sanctified by the HOly Spirit continually, I.e. submitting to the will of GOd by following those promptings continually. If we are not doing that, then we are not in the process of being holy. This is a part of the Doctrine of Christ - becoming as a little child. If we aren't becoming, and we are just doing, then we will not know the Lord in the last day.

[sushi_chef]

probably he was influenced/inspired/convinced by his wife and her friend... favored them over church matters... suits ecumenism way... no??

[Lizzy60]

probably he was influenced/inspired/convinced by his wife and her friend... favored them over church matters... suits ecumenism way... no??

You're a clever one, sushi_chef. I think you're spot on.

[Vision]

I haven't met an active member of the church in real life (as opposed to on LDSFF) who has an issue with the changes.

I would never say I had an issue with the temple changes at church because the first thing that is going to happen is judgement and labeling. There is no room to share your true feelings in the realm of church.

[LukeAir2008]

Strange how everyone consistently is getting directly opposite "Revelation" on this topic. (Strange, this happens on every topic now that I think about it)

It's almost as if there is an incorrect understand of what Revelation is, how it's received, what it "feels" like. Hmmm.

All is well.. all is well.

I don’t think anybody is claiming to have revelation. They are going on their feelings which can be based on a whole number of factors.

Some people have never liked going to the Temple and always feel uncomfortable or even frightened.

The truth is nobody knows why these changes are coming about. I suspect it’s just outside worldly/poltical/legal pressure. Remember it’s illegal to discriminate against anyone because of their race or sex or sexual orientation. They’re just protecting themselves from getting sued or even jailed.

[sushi_chef]

aha..., " truth is nobody knows why these changes are coming about", church hq does not explain the reason to general members....

dishonesty, thieves and usurpers tactics from this world standard view point.

[Rand]

aha..., " truth is nobody knows why these changes are coming about", church hq does not explain the reason to general members....

dishonesty, thieves and usurpers tactics from this world standard view point.

I only know the impressions I have received... the changes were not made out of political pressure. Not at all. This was revelation, pure and simple.