Temple prep - "Toward the Veil"

The following text is taken from the pamphlet "Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple" (2002) and annotated by me.

We must gain some feeling for why we build temples, and why the ordinances are required of us. Feeling, not knowledge. Feelings are more reliable. Thereafter we are continually instructed and enlightened on matters of spiritual importance. We're only continually enlightened if we continually have the same banal questions. Anything more requires something a little more dialectic than what the temple offers (a set script). Students don't learn from a teacher who gives the exact same lesson every day of the year and never stops the lesson to see if the students have questions. It comes line upon line, precept upon precept, until we gain a fullness of light and knowledge. People, there are no additional lines beyond what is included in the script. You're required to fill in all the gaps but no one will ever check your work to make sure you've filled things in correctly. Your conclusions about the meaning of the temple are likely to be extremely idiosyncratic and significantly different from other members. This becomes a great protection to us—to each of us personally. Personally, yes, because you always feel you're right, but certainly not collectively. Can you imagine the kinds of heated arguments that would ensue if members actually had to discuss their long researched (through feelings only) temple epiphanies? We would eat each other alive in a giant feeding fest of heartfelt disagreement. It is a protection also for the Church. Most definitely! If members actually talked about the temple openly the emperor's nakedness would be plain for all to see.

No work is more of a protection to this Church than temple work and the genealogical research which supports it. What? How does genealogical work protect the Church? By giving it a research organ that actually does credible work unlike the moronic apologists over at BYU and FAIR? No work is more spiritually refining. Whatever that means. I would think that Jesus would argue for exercising charity. No work we do gives us more power. Man, you're power hungry to say the least! You keep going off about all the power the temple gives you. Relax. Accept that you're a mortal like the rest of us. No work requires a higher standard of righteousness. Keep fanning our self-righteous ego! It feels so good!

Our labors in the temple cover us with a shield and a protection, both individually and as a people. You've already explained that the individual shield is a layer of cotton-poly blend, but what's this collective shield? A host of angels? A bubble like force field? A veil of ignorance?

It is in the ordinances of the temple that we are placed under covenant to Him—it is there we become the covenant people. Because baptism by water and the Holy Spirit aren't covenants with God? What about the sacrament? Who is that covenant with?

If we will accept the revelation concerning temple ordinance work, if we will enter into our covenants without reservation or apology, the Lord will protect us. Protect us from what? What the hell are you talking about? We will receive inspiration sufficient for the challenges of life. That sounds like minimal inspiration, which is definitely what I got during my years of activity.

The work relating to the temples is true. Huh? What does that even mean? It was revealed from beyond the veil and revelation continues. Which veil, the temple veil or the veil of forgetfulness? If you mean the temple veil you should know the 5 points of contact and all that came from Freemasons, not God. If you mean the veil of forgetfulness, you're going to have to explain a few things like how the hell Elijah and Elias were different people and why anyone should consider plural marriage a divine and holy practice.

Revelation may come to each member of the Church individually concerning temple work. It has to because the Church won't teach about it anywhere in any depth or detail. May we all take the initiative and do a few Internet searches about the temple in our quest for understanding.

So come to the temple—come and claim your blessings. They're the unspecific blessings we'll work the whole rest of our lives trying to identify. It is a sacred work. It is what you want it to be, I guess. I actually dared to want something otherworldly and beautiful. What I got was human and mundane. I doubted my doubts, but I could only delude myself for so long before letting it go.

What if God's not good?

Dear monotheists, what would our world look like if God were some twisted, hateful being instead of a loving, nurturing being? What if God were purely sadistic instead of wholly protective, as we like to think?

Answer: it could very well look exactly the way it does now.

The Euthyphro dilemma

"Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" In other words, does righteousness exist outside of God or does God define what it is?

The Mormon answer has to be that righteousness predates God because Mormons believe that he learned to be righteous while living as a man. God became God heaven knows how long ago and continues to acquire glory and intelligence to this day.

What this means for most Christians is that Mormons are heretical impostors who obviously must deny God's eternal, unchanging status, his omnipotence (how can God be the all-powerful GOD if he is a son of yet another god, and the exact number of gods out there is completely unknown? which god is the most powerful in the end?), his omniscience (does God really know everything if he's just another little scholar in a sort of divinity school?), and his omnipresence (God has a physical body, remember?)

What this means to most Mormons is that they too will one day be gods if they "endure to the end" by continuing to keep the commandments as laid out by the general authorities.

Accepting a god who must abide certain standards of righteousness means God can be measured against those standards, all we have to do is learn them. What Mormons like to ignore is that God very often fails to live up to very basic standards of righteousness. So not only do Mormons end up worshiping a minor god (while Christians claim to worship THE God), they also find themselves with a rebellious god who loves breaking the rules.

The situation is no more tidy for Christians who maintain that God defines and emanates righteousness. The problem here is that righteousness becomes relative - relative to whatever kind of character God is. And what if he's actually evil? What evidence do we have that he's not twisted and malicious?

Sex changes - "become great men"

General authorities have a lot to say about the innate qualities of women and their divinely appointed role here on earth. What happens if we flip the sexes in what they have to say about the topic? Do we have a nonsensical statement because the logic is gender dependent, or do we end up with a statement that still agrees with LDS thought because gender is irrelevant?

"Cultivate and employ generously your noble, manly instincts of care and mercy, first to your family and then to others. May you always hunger and thirst after righteousness within the framework of the revealed gospel of Jesus Christ. May you have an eternal perspective as you go about your angelic cause of doing good so that it will not only lead you to become great men but ultimately to become kings in the eternities." James E. Faust, "How Near to the Angels," New Era, Mar, 1999, 4.

This quote also seems to work just fine when addressing men instead of women. Talk of being caring and merciful might get us thinking about women but it's more likely to get us thinking about Heavenly Father and Jesus, and just as likely to bring to mind our father or grandfathers or even a friend who's a man. Womanliness or femaleness has little, if anything, to do with care and mercy. The other potential clue that the Faust here is talking about women and not men is his reference to "your angelic cause." I would dare say that we typically associate angels and the adjective "angelic" with women,

and yet all the angels mentioned in scripture (with the exception of two possibly evil stork-winged women bearing a woman representing wickedness off to Babylon) are men. No female angels, isn't that interesting? It would very much appear that angelic causes are male causes.

I'm starting to think James Faust was completely off base addressing these thoughts to women.

Becoming Satan and devils

The whole War in Heaven story gave me a lot of grief. It's supposed to be so simple and straightforward: rebellion against God is bad, so choose Good instead of giving into temptation. But let's go back and look at this story a bit more closely.

How did Lucifer fall? He was full of pride, right? He wanted the glory of God all for himself, right? Where did that evil pride and ambition come from if not from God? Did Heavenly Father, the Perfect Being, produce imperfect seed? Is it Heavenly Mother's fault that Lucifer turned rotten?

No! the believing Mormon will tell you. Good and Evil predate God and births of all of his spirit children (but don't ask why we worship Heavenly Father instead of the Goodness that predates him). God became God because he was obedient to the laws of righteousness and Lucifer became the Devil because we wasn't obedient. But where did Lucifer's faulty will to obey come from? Who first tempted Lucifer, our dear brother Morning Star, to stray from the Father?

It doesn't matter! says the believing Mormon. It was all part of the Plan. Heavenly Father needed opposition in his plan. He needed a satan. Lucifer is merely filling that extremely important role of providing bad choices to avoid. Without Satan, we wouldn't have Good and Evil to choose from.

So why is Satan being punished for his rebellion against God if his rebellion and all his tempting are so incredibly vital to the whole plan? Shouldn't he at least get awarded Best Supporting Actor in this whole charade?

One last thought: if Heavenly Father's plan was to have us all choose between his Plan and Satan's alternate, evil plan, and everyone already knew that Heavenly Father's Plan ends with Satan getting his ass kicked, why did anyone, including Satan, vote for the alternate plan?

Pride! the true believer will say again. And I say, really? I thought the rebellious spirits all wanted a guaranteed return to Heavenly Father. Wouldn't they automatically realize their rebellion was pointless the second they heard Heavenly Father say "Hey, you little fucks, stop rebelling or I'll cast you into Outer Darkness FOREVER!"? Wouldn't that have been enough to change the minds of all of those spirits who were too scared of making bad decisions in the first place?

Can you see why I doubt the veracity of this story? It lacks rhyme, reason and plausibility.

Christmas confusion: holiday origins

Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (possibly), Saturnalia, Yule, Koleda, Winter Solstice - in a word: Christmas before Christ. This is where it all began. The shortest day of the year (which happens to be today this year) has been celebrated in various way across Europe and elsewhere centuries, if not millennia, before Jesus was ever laid in a manger. Many of these traditions are still practiced under the guise of Christian worship.

Isn't it a bit strange that one of the biggest celebrations in Christianity is little more than a ripoff of non-Christian peoples? Christianity is little more than a latecomer to the already teaming milieu of late-December religious holidays. Isn't it strange that Christianity has not bothered purging the pagan from this most holy of holidays? Doesn't that make us all practicing pagans to some degree?

Does it matter at all where Christimas came from as long as we make it mean whatever we want it to mean? Hasn't commercialism already effectively undermined the Christian facade it now bears?

We've really improved on the beauty of the holiday, haven't we? Happy Winter Solstice, brothers and sisters.

Gone rogue

It's been said (by a prophet and repeated frequently by others) that God will not let his people be lead astray. You can find this in LDS scripture and in the Church's general teachings about the nature of the relationship between God and his prophets.

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty.

Is this why Joseph Smith was murdered at 44? Was the mob at Carthage somehow sent by God to remove his delusional and fallen prophet? Was Brigham wrong to take up the bizarre cause of polygamy? What if we can't trust the Brighamite branch of Mormonism at all?

If we can't trust Brigham and his followers than we can't trust what Wilford said either, and I totally believe what Wilford said, ergo everything must be fine. Joseph must have been a holy son of a gun and Brigham must have been right to fight for polygamy. The Church is true! Doubt no longer!

Why God requires polygamy

The LDS Church did something big. It finally opened up to discussing its lesser-known polygamist past. Congratulations, Mormons. Truly and sincerely.

But I do have a few questions:

1. What is inherently righteous, holy or godly about plural marriage? Where is the divinity in this principle?

2. Why is polygamy part of the Gospel Restoration? What does it have to do with the Fall, the Atonement and the Final Judgement? How does it fit into the salvation of humankind?

3. What good did plural marriage accomplish either for God or Joseph or any of his wives or anyone else involved in a plural marriage or the Mormon community in general or humanity at large?

From what I can tell the article offers no answers. Why not?

Fashion trends

God doesn't give a shit about what we mortals might think is cool. God tells us what is right and we adjust our thoughts and behavior to match his righteousness. End of story.

Heavenly fatherliness #42 - Feeling protected

According to popular wisdom, a good father makes his children feel protected.

Feeling protected means we experience peace of mind knowing that Heavenly Father protects us, loves us, comforts us, and will stand up for us. I think a good many believers do feel that protection and it gives them confidence and strength. But I also believe just as many believers constantly feel vulnerable and in need of protection. In fact, I would say that believers, the righteous as well as the wicked, even feel threatened by God himself and his ever-looming judgements against them.

It's a strange head game God is playing, one in which we're always left guessing whether or not we're still on his good list. How safe does that really make us feel?

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father.

Heavenly fatherliness #39 - Protection

According to popular wisdom, a good father protects his family at all costs.

As the story goes, God cursed us with pain and disease and death. That's the opposite of protection. But that's because Heavenly Father's concerned mostly about protecting our ability to make choices and less concerned about protecting us physically. That's why he was willing to permanently exile a third of his spirit children - because they were anti-choice. That's why God placed us in a crazy, mixed up world, so we can try to navigate it by making righteous choices. Righteousness will then protect us from sin and pain.

OK, that's not really true. No mortal man can be righteous enough to avoid sin, and even the most righteous are still vulnerable to the all sorts of painful experiences, like accidents, sicknesses, natural disasters, deaths of loved ones, ugly breakups, disappointment, and all the rest. All righteous choices can do is make you a prime candidate for the Celestial Kingdom. It's the kind of protection you might expect from a shady insurance company, but with even foggier details.

When it comes to the cost of all of this, apparently it was enormous: the blood sacrifice of one perfectly righteous demi-god. Never mind that that God got a full return on his investment within a few hours. Which one of your children would you give up to die horribly if you knew you could get him or her right back?

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father.

Heavenly fatherliness #34 - Pride in children

According to popular wisdom, a good father takes pride in his children.

Basically Heavenly Father is only proud of us when we make righteous choices, which means we obey him. He's really into obedience. Heavenly Father is especially proud of his boy Jesus, in whom he is well pleased. He's also well pleased with a very select few other sons (sometimes). Not so much daughters, though. I don't think God's ever expressed pride for a daughter.

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father.

Heavenly fatherliness #25 - Encouraging family members

According to popular belief, a good father encourages family members.

Does Heavenly Father do this? Does he encourage us? If you're like me, you were told that God is always pleading with us to live a righteous and holy life, and doesn't that sound a hell of a lot like encouragement? And think about all of his prophets who talk to us all the time at General Conference. They encourage the shit out of us!

The thing is that God's encouragement comes via a long list of appeals that any logical person would throw out as irrelevant to righteousness and holiness. He appeals to his authority (he's The Great I Am), to bad consequences (you'll be miserable if you think and do differently), to force (he will destroy us if we disobey or are found unclean), and appeals to wealth (you'll have treasures untold in Heaven, maybe even a harem!). Even should any of these appeals prove true, they do not make God an especially good motivator, just more of a manipulator.

Then again, God's not interested in teaching his children to think. God wants obedience above all - above service and kindness and tolerance. Ignorant faith and blind obedience are worth more than thoughtful disillusionment and disaffection. That sounds like an Asshole Father to me.

*These attributes represent the popular thoughts of Ask Men’s Jullian Marcus, examiner.com’s Tanya Tringali, and Open Talk Magazine’s Glenn Silvestre as per their respective articles on what makes a good father.