Should ex-Mormons continue to wear their garments?

[_Polygamy Porter]

The Nibley links I posted are there because he draws from numerous sources outside of Mormonism. Each reference is footnoted for source. Please read them and don't simply dismiss them because they're FARMS.

Blixa what about the Garden of Eden in the South American Temple? The Rainbow is obviously a room for the teaching of the Flood, and the lightning room may of been a room to teach the creation. Its all there.

Wait, so you believe the entire world was under water?

That explains a lot.

[_Gazelam]

Thanks to a friend of mine who took my through a Bible study that showed me that covenants need blood and sacrifice I know that the temple covenants are not binding. However, I still love my Heavenly Father and wish to deal honorably with Him. Make sense?

The animal sacrifices ended with the end of the Law of Moses. Yes they took place before the Law of Moses also, but The Savior put a stop to that when he came. He was the last sacrifice of the sheding of blood. It is said that he will re-introduce this again in the millinium, but for our time we are not asked to do this.

3 Nephi chp.9
15 Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name.
16 I came unto my own, and my own received me not. And the scriptures concerning my coming are fulfilled.
17 And as many as have received me, to them have I given to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me redemption cometh, and in me is the law of Moses fulfilled.
18 I am the light and the life of the world. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.
19 And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.
20 And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost, even as the Lamanites, because of their faith in me at the time of their conversion, were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not.
21 Behold, I have come unto the world to bring redemption unto the world, to save the world from sin.
22 Therefore, whoso repenteth and cometh unto me as a little child, him will I receive, for of such is the kingdom of God. Behold, for such I have laid down my life, and have taken it up again; therefore repent, and come unto me ye ends of the earth, and be saved.

[_Dr. Shades]

Blixa what about the Garden of Eden in the South American Temple?

There's no such thing.

The Rainbow is obviously a room for the teaching of the Flood, . . .

What's the connection? If that room was meant to teach about the flood, it would depict a flood, an ark, etc., not necessarily a rainbow. You may as well say that a mural depicting a tree must've been meant to teach about the flood, since trees were cut down to build the ark. See the tenuousness of the connection?

. . .and the lightning room may of been a room to teach the creation.

What on earth is the connection? You might as well say that a tuna casserole room may have been a room about the creation.

Its all there.

I think not.

[Ahoody]

The Nibley links I posted are there because he draws from numerous sources outside of Mormonism. Each reference is footnoted for source. Please read them and don't simply dismiss them because they're FARMS.

Blixa what about the Garden of Eden in the South American Temple? The Rainbow is obviously a room for the teaching of the Flood, and the lightning room may of been a room to teach the creation. Its all there.

Gaz, Nibley can cite anything he chooses, but he makes sense of it within a Mormon paradigm. And he makes an interpretation of it that favors Mormonism: this is why its published by FARMS. His essay, then, is NOT an source outside of Mormonism, no matter what material he's using. An essay by a nonmormon that came to the same conclusions would be an actual "outside source."

Furthermore, I should also say, Gaz, that as an academic I don't have respect for his work. What I've read of it (admittedly only a small fraction of the total output, but still enough to fill a couple of books) is not impressive to me. Frankly, anyone who could pen "No Ma'am That's Not History," has forever given up his "right to be read" IMHO. Yes, I know he was likely pressured to write it and other bits of spiritual crisis management, and I have sympathey for the agonizingly difficult position he must have lived much of his life in. But take him seriously as an intellectual? Not I.

[_Blixa]

P.S. Rockefeller Center also has a Rainbow Room.

[_Yoda]

It is said that he will re-introduce this again in the millinium, but for our time we are not asked to do this.

Do you have references on this one?

My understanding is that the law of sacrifice is a symbol of the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore, when Christ made the actual sacrifice, he fulfilled the law. There will be no need for this law to be continued in the Millenium. It would make no sense.

[_Seven]

It is said that he will re-introduce this again in the millinium, but for our time we are not asked to do this.

Do you have references on this one?

My understanding is that the law of sacrifice is a symbol of the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore, when Christ made the actual sacrifice, he fulfilled the law. There will be no need for this law to be continued in the Millenium. It would make no sense.

That is also how I view it Liz. It doesn't make any sense for us to be laying animals on an alter during the millenium unless it is practice for the future Gods to sacrifice a future "Savior" of their future world. Gaz is probably referring to statements made by church leaders in the past. I don't have it in front of me but I believe I read it in "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. Mckonkie. But we all know that book is really just "Mormon opinion."

[_Runtu]

Furthermore, I should also say, Gaz, that as an academic I don't have respect for his work. What I've read of it (admittedly only a small fraction of the total output, but still enough to fill a couple of books) is not impressive to me. Frankly, anyone who could pen "No Ma'am That's Not History," has forever given up his "right to be read" IMHO. Yes, I know he was likely pressured to write it and other bits of spiritual crisis management, and I have sympathey for the agonizingly difficult position he must have lived much of his life in. But take him seriously as an intellectual? Not I.

I remember reading "No Ma'am, That's Not History" in the BYU library right after I'd finished reading Brodie's book. Even as a still-believer, I thought that little pamphlet was embarrassing. It is indeed hard to take someone who wrote such crap seriously.

[_The Nehor]

It is said that he will re-introduce this again in the millinium, but for our time we are not asked to do this.

Do you have references on this one?

My understanding is that the law of sacrifice is a symbol of the sacrifice of Christ. Therefore, when Christ made the actual sacrifice, he fulfilled the law. There will be no need for this law to be continued in the Millenium. It would make no sense.

Joseph taught that the Law of Sacrifice must be restored for at least one sacrifice in this dispensation to fulfill the restoration of all things. Note, this is not the restoration of the Law of Moses but the return of the Abrahamic sacrifice. Joseph taught that this would not be a common practice and perhaps only one sacrifice would be made.

[_JAK]

Porter,

Am I wrong in saying that the garments were directly related to secretiveness regarding polygamy?

Jersey Girl

Nope.

They were initially only worn by those in Smith inner circle that had the secret of celestial marriage reveled to them..

http://i4m.com/think/temples/temple_legacy.htm

Great multiple references, P. Porter with extended detail.

JAK