livy111us

Love is not conditional on weight. I love my wife exactly the same no matter how much she weighs. Anyone who isn't shallow would agree with me. I think that is absolutely absurd and should raise BIG red flags! As you age, you will most likely gain weight. Does he expect you to have a perfect body your entire life? What is he going to do if you don't?

To make it easier: Abraham in Egypt by Hugh W. Nibley An Approach to the Book of Mormon by Hugh W. Nibley The Ancient State by Hugh W. Nibley Approaching Zion by Hugh W. Nibley Brother Brigham Challenges the Saints by Hugh W. Nibley Enoch the Prophet by Hugh W. Nibley Lehi in the Desert; The World of the Jaredites; There Were Jaredites by Hugh W. Nibley Mormonism and Early Christianity by Hugh W. Nibley Old Testament and Related Studies by Hugh W. Nibley The Prophetic Book of Mormon by Hugh W. Nibley Since Cumorah by Hugh W. Nibley Teachings of the Book of Mormon: Semester 1 by Hugh W. Nibley Teachings of the Book of Mormon: Semester 2 by Hugh W. Nibley Teachings of the Book of Mormon: Semester 3 by Hugh W. Nibley Teachings of the Book of Mormon: Semester 4 by Hugh W. Nibley Temple and Cosmos by Hugh W. Nibley Tinkling Cymbals and Sounding Brass by Hugh W. Nibley When the Lights Went Out: Three Studies on the Ancient Apostasy by Hugh W. Nibley The World and the Prophets by Hugh W. Nibley

There are many of Hugh Nibley's books on the NAMI website along with numerous other books. You can see them all here: Publications - Books

Since John Dehlin does not believe Joseph Smith is a Prophet, The Book of Mormon to be the word of God, questions the existence of God, and has led many people out of the Church, I think it's safe to say he is apostate.

FAIR has an article on this subject that should be able to help you. Doctrine and Covenants/Contradiction between Section 132 and Jacob 2 - FAIRMormon

Here are a few quotes that you may find helpful. “What the Church requires is only belief that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, Deseret Morning News March 1st 2006) In a 1992 section on evolution in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, the church-sanctioned entry reads that: "The scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how, though the Lord has promised that he will tell that when he comes again." It ended with a reiteration that "Adam is the primal parent of our race. A] Whether the mortal bodies of man evolved in natural processes to present perfection, through the direction and power of God; whether the first parents of our generations, Adam and Eve, were transplanted from another sphere, with immortal tabernacles, which became corrupted through sin and the partaking of natural foods, in the process of time; [C] whether they were born here in mortality, as other mortals have been, are questions not fully answered in the revealed word of God. - "Priesthood Quorums’ Table," Improvement Era 13 no. 4 (April 1910): 570. [Joseph F. Smith as president of the Church and Edward H. Anderson were editors of the magazine at the time. The editorial was unsigned.] “Perhaps if we had the full story of the creation of the earth and man told to us in great detail, it would be more of a mystery than the simple few statements that we have contained in the Bible, because of our lack of ability to comprehend. Therefore, for reasons best known to the Lord, He has kept us in darkness. Wait until the Lord speaks, or wait until that day when He shall come. . . . Then we shall know all things pertaining to this earth, how it was made, and all things that now as children we are groping for and trying to understand. Let's reserve judgment as to the facts concerning the Creation until we know these things for sure.” The Teachings of Harold B. Lee: Eleventh President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, ed. Clyde J. Williams (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1998), 29, citing "Story of the Creation," BYU Summer School Lecture, 22 June 1954. and a few articles you may be interested in: http://emp.byui.edu/claytonr/FAQ.pdf Science and Religion LDS Science Quotes No definitive LDS stance on evolution, study finds | Deseret News http://sites.google.com/a/transfigurism.org/transfigurism-wiki/Home/quotes-1/mormon-quotes-on-science-and-technology BYU Museum of Paleontology - Paleontological Research

The absolute best commentary that I've ever read, and I've read A LOT of them, is by Brant Gardner. If you want to know what is going on from a spiritual, contextual, historical, archaeological, and geographical point of view, then this is the commentary for you. FAIR LDS Bookstore - Second Witness: Analytical & Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon Vol 6 4th Nephi to Moroni

Many of the elements pre-date masonry to early Christianity and Judaism. So it really wouldn't be borrowing from masonry, would it?

Logically, I would say no. But then I look at my wife and I realize that I couldn't ask for anything more. She is absolutely perfect in every way. We mold together in such a way that our relationship is harmonious. So, I have changed my mind and believe that at least in my situation, there is such thing as soul mates.

Don't expect a response, rameumptom. Moundbuilder is known for making outlandish hit and run claims. He won't pop up until there is another chance to share that link of his.

Brigham Young said something similar, but not quite. He said that we could call on our loved ones in lower kingdoms to be helpers, but they would remain in a Terrestial glory. I know that there is no man on this earth who can call around him property, be he a merchant, tradesman, or farmer, with his mind continually occupied with: "How shall I get this or that; how rich can I get; or, how much can I get out of this brother or from that brother?" and dicker and work, and take advantage here and there-no such man ever can magnify the priesthood nor enter the celestial kingdom. Now, remember, they will not enter that kingdom; and if they happen to go there, it will be because somebody takes them by the hand, saying, "I want you for a servant;" or, "Master, will you let this man pass in my service? "Yes, he may go into your service; but he is not fit for a lord, nor a master, nor fit to be crowned;" and if such men get there, it will be because somebody takes them in as servants. -Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 11:297, February 3, 1867 In obedience to this work, in the gospel of Jesus Christ, I shall gather around me my family, my children, my children's children, until they become as numerous as the seed of Abraham, or as countless as the sands upon the seashore. For this is my right and privilege and the right and privilege of every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who holds the priesthood and will magnify it in the sight of God. Joseph F. Smith, Conference Reports, p. 137, April, 1912 It is not doctrine by any means, but is interesting speculation that I hope is true.

Not sure how giant skeletons prove that The BOM took place in Ohio, but here is just as a reliable link as yours (which isn't very) to giant skeletons found in Mexico GIANTS' SKELETONS FOUND. - Cave in Mexico Gives Up the Bones of an Ancient Race. - View Article - NYTimes.com There is no evidence of great battles in Ohio during BOM times. In fact, there is little evidence of small battles in that area during BOM times. The Hopewell were very small in number and the entire population would have been wiped out by only a few battles mentioned in The BOM, let alone the many large battles. The evidence just doesn't exist that The BOM took place in Ohio.

Don't forget, Joseph Smith called Mesoamerica the land of the Nephites as well. Some only tend to quote Joseph Smith when he supports their theory.

Alternate readings from the Bible are nothing new. Even in the first few centuries after Christ there were variants to the Bible. Here are some examples from Early Christian Fathers: Luke 13:6– "Behold, now these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig-tree, but I find none" (ANF 1:518) KJV Luke13:6 He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. Gen. 3:15"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; He shall be on the watch for (observabit) thy head, and thou on the watch for His heel." (ANF 1:548) Cyril of Jerusalem, intro and translation by Edward Yarnold, S.J., (London, Routledge 2000). Letter to Constantius 68-70: Note 8, at end of text: “One MS adds: ‘as you ever give glory to the holy and consubstantial Trinity, our true God, to whom all glory belongs for ever and ever. Amen.’ However, as Cyril nowhere else uses the Nicene term ‘consubstantial’ [homoousios], preferring the term ‘like’ [homoios], and generally prefers scriptural language to philosophical, the sentence is likely to be an interpolation /see intro 33-56/” (195, note 8). The manuscripts of Cyril’s works give an outline at the beginning of his 18 catechetical discourses, to which Yarnold adds the following: “It can be seen that the baptismal Creed in use in Jerusalem was similar to the Nicene Creed, though without the anti-Arian formulas. Some MSS insert the Nicene Creed itself at the end of 18.12; but this is probably a scribal addition” (88). Catechesis 10.6: Cyril first quotes Gen. 1.26-7 and then says: “‘The text does not restrict the divine dignity to the Father alone, but included the Son, to show that man is not only the work of God but also of our Lord Jesus Christ’” (121). Note 4 at this point reads: “Some MSS continue: ‘who is also true God.’” (198). Catechesis 11.4: “Scripture says also with regard to other men: ‘you are sons of the Lord your God.’ And in another place: ‘I said, ‘you are all gods and son of the Most High’’ [Ps 82.6; John 10.35]. ‘I said,’ not ‘I begot.’ They received adoption when God spoke, and did not enjoy it before. But Christ did not first exist in one form before being begotten in another, but he was begotten as Son from the beginning, Son of the Father in every way like his Begetter [‘3], Light begotten from Light, Truth from Truth, Wisdom from Wisdom, King from the King, God from God, and Power from Power” (130). Note 3: “Cyril avoids using the term homoousios, preferring to speak of ‘similarity’ rather than identity. Some MSS add ‘eternal from the eternal Father,’ which was perhaps added in order to reject the Arian belief that ‘there was when the Son was not’” (198-9). Mystagogic Catechesis 3.3: “…Christ’s grace which imparts to us his own divinity through the presence of the Holy Spirit” (177). Note 7 reads: “Accepting the minority reading parousiai instead of Piedagnel’s parousias.” 204, note 7. Mystagogic Catechesis 4. 1. This teaching of blessed Paul is sufficient to give us assurance concerning the sacred mysteries to which you were admitted when you became ‘of one body’ [Eph 3.6] and one blood with Christ. For we heard Paul declare just now: ‘for on the night on which our Lord Jesus Christ was betrayed, taking bread and giving thanks he broke it and gave it to his disciples saying: ‘take, eat, this is my body.’ And taking the cup and giving thanks he said: ‘take, drink, this is my blood’’/1/” (179). Note 1 reads: “St. Paul’s account of the Last Supper does not include the words ‘take, eat,’ ‘take, drink.’ In fact the word ‘take’ before ‘drink’ does not appear in the gospel accounts either, but it is found in some Egyptian liturgies, such as that of the Deir Balyzeh papyrus. Moreover, Cyril quotes the words ‘this is my body/blood’ in an order which is not to be found anywhere in the New Testament, though it is followed in the Palestinian Liturgy of St. James. It seems likely therefor that Cyril is quoting from the liturgy here, which incidentally provides evidence that his liturgy included an Institution Narrative. Cf. Edward Yarnold, ‘Anaphoras without Institution Narratives?,’ Studia Patristica 30 (1997): 395-410, esp. 405-6; 409-10; introduction, sec 4. Basil of Caesarea “The existence of textual variants to this passage [Life of Moses 2.82], which omit all reference to universal salvation, testifies to the scandal felt by later Greek readers at Gregory’s espousal of this position; see the note of J. Danielou in his edition, ad loc (SC 1.155 [and translation, note 102]); also his article ‘L’Apocatastase chez saint Gregoire de Nysse,’ RSR 30 (1940): 328-47, esp. 329-37. The same uneasiness of later scribes on Gregory’s espousal of the apokatastasis theory is attested by glosses and variants in a number of manuscripts of his De Anima et Resurrectione, which has unfortunately not yet been critically edited” Brian E. Daley, S.J., The Hope of the Early Church (Cambridge 1991): 241, note 23. Tertullian “The Apologeticum, in account of its great importance, boasts by far the largest number of manuscripts. It has a tradition of its own…. No less than thirty-six codices preserve its text and constitute the so-called Vulgata recensio…. But there is another text tradition which differs from the Vulgata recensio a great deal…. No less than 900 variants…. Thus we know that in the tenth century there were already two different groups of manuscripts, the one represented by the Vulgata recensio, the other by the Fuldensis. The question is, how can this difference be explained?” Quasten, Patrology 2: 260-1. Both versions have been altered, 262. His Adversus Marcion was copied and distributed by a “brother, who became afterwards an apostate. He, as it happened, had transcribed a portion of it, full of mistakes, and then published it. The necessity thus arose for an amended work” Quasten, Patrology 2: 274, text quoted Jerome: Against the Pelagians 2.5: with reference to Matthew 5.22: “He who is angry with his brother without cause shall be liable to judgment’; although in many of the ancient copies, the phrase, ‘without cause’, has not been added, so that we should not be angry, to be sure, even with cause” (FOC 53: 302) John Chrysostom Francis T. Gignac, S.J., “Evidence for Deliberate Scribal Revision in Chrysostom’s Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles,” in Nova et Vetera. Patristic Studies in Honor of Thomas Patrick Halton, ed. John Petruccione (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America 1998): 209-225. Psalm 109:3 [septuagint] ‘Before the morning star, I begot you. KJV Psalm 110:3 [Masoretic system] in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth. [sIDE NOTE:The KJV represents a translation from the Masoretic (traditional) vocalization. The Septuagint translators apparently understood the consonants (yldtyk) differently, and translate as "I have begotten thee from the womb before the morning." Some Hebrew manuscripts also read the way the LXX did. There are six textual notes for this verse in the Word Biblical Commentary. On this word, they say, "The military context suggests that the basically abstract י?ל?ד?ו?ת?, "youth," is used concretely and collectively with the sense "young men." In its only other occurrence, Eccl 11:9–10, it means "youth, boyhood." For the development in meaning, Syr. ?alyût(a), "youth, young men," may be compared. LXX and Syr. understood as י?ְ?ל?ִ?ד?ְ?ת?ּ?ִ?י?ך?ָ?, "I have begotten you," a pointing found in many Heb. MSS. This reading is preferred by many, including Kraus ([1989] 344–45). It recurs in Ps 2:7 with reference to the divine legitimation of the Davidic king. There are many parallels between Pss 2 and 110. Is this a further one, or has the overall similarity encouraged this variant? The structure of the psalm suggests the latter: the divine oracles in which Yahweh speaks seem to be clearly marked out by their introductions in vv 1,4. After the third-person reference to Yahweh in v 2, the difficulty of postulating a divine "I" at this point has been noted by a number of scholars; divine speech structurally fits only vv 1 and 4. The form in MT is irregular. The yod could theoretically indicate a pl. (cf. GKC §95u), but a pl. is not expected here. It could be abnormal scriptio plena, though if the psalm is early this is unlikely to be an original form. The form may represent a mixed reading, combining textual variants י?ַ?ל?ְ?ד?ֻ?ת?ְ?ך?ָ?, "your youth," and י?ְ?ל?ִ?ד?ְ?ת?ּ?ִ?י?ך?ָ?, "I have begotten you."]

The conjecture on this thread is getting a little too deep for me....

Here are some short videos of scholars on this subject:

There is plenty of evidence of warfare and armor in Mesoamerica: Book of Mormon/Warfare - FAIRMormon

The August 2007 issue of National Geographic has a very interesting article on the Maya called "The Maya Glory and Ruin." (pages 68-109) The article consists of three parts and has some beautiful photos. According to the article, in recent years our ability to decipher some of the Mayan glyphs and writings has improved. The article talks about some of this newly understood information. According to National Geographic, in the January of 378 A.D. a warlord named Fire is Born is recorded as having arrived among the Maya in the city of Waka. He was sent from Teotihuacan (north of the Maya lands). He was a foreign envoy from the great powerful civilization to the north. He is mentioned in many of the carvings left by the Maya after 378 A.D. It seems that his arrival coincided with a significant change in the Maya civilization. He did this by taking over, with his soldiers, a number of Mayan cities and managed to somehow bring a bunch of individual city-states together into a unified civilization. The previous rulers were sacrificed, and their monuments and records were all destroyed. Fire is Born’s plan was to conquer Mayan cities and eliminate rivals. After taking over the first cities, he raised more troops to take over the rest. He wiped out the old rulers and initiated a new era of civilization among the Maya. I found the date 378 A.D. intriguing. I wondered what the Book of Mormon recorded as happening at that time, since it is very near the time that the Nephite civilization was about to be completely obliterated. Here is what I found. According to the Book of Mormon, in the period of 364 to 375 A.D., Mormon notes battles between the “Lamanites” and the “Nephites” in which they were somewhat evenly matched. The Lamanites won battles and the Nephites won battles, but neither group seemed to be on the verge of wiping the other out. Now, check out what happens in the year 375 A.D. – Mormon 4:16-18 “And the Lamanites did not come again against the Nephites until the three hundred and seventy and fifth year. And in this year they did come down against the Nephites with all their powers; and they were not numbered because of the greatness of their number. And from this time forth did the Nephites gain no power over the Lamanites, but began to be swept off by them even as a dew before the sun.” It seems that the year 375 A.D. was the real beginning of the end for the Nephites. There’s a bit more. Here’s what National Geographic says: “But the most poignant testimony to [Fire is Born’s] empire-building comes from Uaxactun, just 12 miles from Tikal. There a mural shows a Maya nobleman giving homage to a warrior in Teotihuacan regalia—perhaps one of Fire is Born’s troops. A stela depicting a similar warrior guards a tomb where archaeologists found the remains of two women, one pregnant, a child and an infant. Freidel and others have concluded that these were the remains of Uaxactun’s royal family, slain by Tikal’s forces. The king, presumably, was taken to Tikal and sacrificed there.” Fire is Born sacrificed the women and children of the royal families of the cities that he took over. So what does the Book of Mormon say? If we read further in Mormon 21-22: “And when they had come the second time, the Nephites were driven and slaughtered with an exceedingly great slaughter; their women and their children were again sacrificed unto idols. And it came to pass that the Nephites did again flee from before them, taking all the inhabitants with them, both in towns and villages.” According to the Book of Mormon, during the period of 375 A.D. to 380 A.D., Mormon decided to once again lead the Nephites in battle. He had sworn that he would not do so again, but he could see that they were in big trouble. Here’s the situation in the Book of Mormon in 379 A.D. (Mormon 5:5): “But it came to pass that whatsoever lands we had passed by, and the inhabitants thereof were not gathered in, were destroyed by the Lamanites, and their towns, and villages, and cities were burned with fire; and thus three hundred and seventy and nine years passed away.” The Lamanites were on a rampage, destroying everything that existed before. It was the end of civilization as the Nephites knew it. A new civilization was going to replace them. National Geographic states: “Fire is Born appears to have dropped whatever pretense he had assumed as a goodwill ambassador. His forces destroyed most of Tikal’s existing monuments—stelae put in place by 14 earlier rulers of Tikal. A new era had begun, and later monuments celebrated the victors.”

Not a fan of fiction in general, but even more so with Mormon fiction. I like to learn and although some are based in fact, they are liberal in their interpretations of what might have happened, or what will happen, and more times than not it will come up in Gospel Doctrine as fact. These books may be entertaining, but too many people use them as a source of doctrine. I say stick to the scriptures and *sound* scholarly material. We have enough amateurs writing "doctrinal" books that even though they say what we want to hear, usually are full of flaws. When it comes to fiction, it is not so much the writers fault as it is the gullibility and ignorance of the readers.

The Anti-Nephi-Lehis were immigrants to the Nephite land and were treated as equals and given land.

A year long waiting list? What is that about? She should have had it repaired within a week.

High Nibley has a great article on baptisms for the dead: Baptism for the Dead in Ancient Times As well as John Tvedtnes: Baptism for the Dead: The Coptic Rationale “This paper was presented at a symposium held 5 June 1981 in Jerusalem, sponsored by the L.A. Mayer Memorial Museum of Islamic Art and the Israel Ministry of Education and Culture and later published in Special Papers of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology, No. 2 (September 1989). The Jerusalem symposium marked the opening of an exhibit of Coptic art at the museum. I was one of two American scholars invited to speak. Other participants came from England, Belgium, Austria and Israel. This paper is admitted out-of-date, having been succeeded by my more lengthy “Baptism for the Dead in Early Christianity”, published in Donald W. Parry and Stephen D. Ricks, The Temple in Time and Eternity (Provo: FARMS, 1999). The real importance of the earlier study goes beyond its content because it was presented at an international scholarly conference in 1983, where it was warmly received.--John Tvetness One of the practices that sets the Coptic Church apart from most of the Christian world is that of proxy baptism for the dead 1. In order to understand the rationale for this ceremony, it is necessary to both establish its antiquity in Christianity and to discuss some of its antecedents in the ancient Egyptian religion. The earliest reference to the practice is found in the New Testament, in 1 Corinthians 15:29: Else what shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead? That the practice was considered rare and even aberrant by the fourth century is evidenced by the fact that only the Marcionites of that era are said to have continued such baptisms. Epiphanius describes the Marcionite rite as follows: In this country--I mean Asia--and even Galatia, their school flourished eminently and a traditional fact concerning them has reached us, that when any of them had died without baptism, they used to baptize others in their name, lest in the resurrection they should suffer punishment as unbaptized. (Heresies 8:7) Tertullian also notes the existence of proxy baptisms among the Marcionites and wrote that the practice was based on the passage in 1 Corinthians. Unable to explain the meaning of Paul’s words, he wrote, Now never mind that practice, whatever it may have been...do not suppose that the apostle here indicates some new god as the author and advocate of this [baptism for the dead. His only aim in alluding to it was] that he might all the more firmly insist upon the resurrection of the body...(Against Marcion, Book v, Chap. x) St. Chrystostom tells of how the Marcionites, when one of their catechumens died without baptism, would place a living person under the dead man’s bed and ask whether he desired to be baptized. The living person would respond in the affirmative and was then baptized as a proxy for the deceased (Homily XL on 1 Corinthians 15). But Chrysostom believed that Marcion erred in his interpretation of Paul and that the real referent was the profession of faith in baptism, part of which was, “I believe in the resurrection of the dead.” He notes, “Before baptism we confess our faith ‘in the resurrection of the dead’, and are baptized in hope of this resurrection.” 2 It is true that, in other passages (Romans 6:305, Colossians 2:12), Paul spoke of baptism as symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ and of those who wish to follow him into a new life. Nevertheless, despite attempts by some of the early Church Fathers to give a symbolic meaning only to the passage in 1 Corinthians 15:29, the wording of the latter clearly implies proxy baptism. That baptism for the dead was indeed practiced in some orthodox Christian circles is indicated by the decision of two late fourth century councils. The fourth canon of the Synod of Hippo 3, held in 393, declares “The Eucharist shall not be given to dead bodies, nor baptism conferred upon them.” The ruling was confirmed four years later in the sixth canon of the Third Council of Carthage 4. The monophylistic church of Egypt was not represented at these minor councils and hence did not feel bound to discontinue the practice. To my knowledge, only two Christian congregations have continued to practice proxy baptisms for the dead through the centuries. These are the Mandaeans of Iraq and Iran and the Copts of Egypt. Two modern churches--The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) and some of the Neo-Apostolic congregations of Europe--have revived the practice during the last century and a half. The vast majority of Christianity, however, rejected proxy baptism. In some cases, as in the Roman Catholic faith, it was replaced by prayers and masses for the dead. As early as the fourth century, prayers of this nature were known, as evidenced by the Lectures on the Mysteries by Cyril of Jerusalem. He wrote: I have often heard people ask: What good does it do the departed spirit, whether the person was good or bad in life, to be remembered in prayer?...Answer: By doing for them and for ourselves what a loving God requires, we make available the atoning sacrifice which Christ made for our sins. 5 The same philosophy appears to have existed in some Jewish circles. The earliest reference to the idea is from the history of the Hasmonaeans. Following the battle of Marisa in 163 BC, it was discovered that each of the Jewish soldiers killed in the fight had been guilty of concealing pagan idols beneath his clothing. In order to atone for their wrong, Judas Maccabaeus collected money from the survivors in order to purchase sacrificial animals for their comrades. “And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachmas of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection: for if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead. And also in that he perceived that there was great favor laid up for those died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.” (2 Maccabees 12:43-45) In a sense, sacrifice did in ancient Judaism what baptism does in Christianity: it cleansed from sin. Jesus is reported to have said to Nicodemus, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). If, therefore, baptism was so essential to eternal salvation, it is almost inconceivable that early Christianity would not have had a means whereby it could be administered to the righteous who died without having the opportunity to hear of Jesus’ atonement. In Christianity, the work of salvation for the dead is depicted by Christ’s visit to the spirit world during the three days his body lay in the tomb. First expressed in the New Testament (John 5:25-29; 1 Peter 3:18-21), it is said that “for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.” 7 Early Christian stories of the descensus of Christ into hell are virtually unanimous in noting the joy felt by the righteous dead when they learned of Jesus’ baptism. Of this, J. Rendel Harris wrote, “In the earliest times, the Baptism of Christ was the occasion of His triumph over Hades.” 8 Harris saw the 24th Ode of Solomon as connecting baptism (note the mention of the dove over Jesus’ head) with anointing and the deliverance of the dead. (i.e., resurrection). In Ode 6, too, we have a stream bringing water to the temple and which brought back from the dead those who were dying. Baptism of the souls of the dead or of their resurrected bodies is a frequent theme in the descensus stories, many of which come from Egypt. The Epistle of the Apostles, known from a complete Ethiopic version, a fragmentary fifth century Latin manuscript (now in Vienna) and a fourth or fifth century mutilated Coptic manuscript in Cairo, is an example. It places the following words in the mouth of Jesus, visiting with his apostles after the resurrection: For to that end went I down unto the place of Lazarus, and preached unto the righteous and the prophets, that they might come out of the rest which is below and come up into that which is above; and I poured out upon them with my right hand the water [baptism, Ethiopic text] of life and forgiveness and salvation from all evil, as I have done unto you and unto them that believe on me. 9 The Acta Pilati, in its present form from the fifth century 10, has a later appendage (Part II, The Descent into Hell) that probably predates the first sections 11. It tells how, when Christ descended into hell, he removed therefrom the spirits of the righteous and of the repentant. The latter were then baptized in the Jordan River. 12 The Gospel of Bartholomew, extant only in Coptic 13, tells of how Siophanes, son of the Apostle Thomas, had died. His soul was taken to heaven by Michael, who washed him three times in the Acherusian lake beforehand 14. This lake plays a similar role in other pseudepigraphal works 15. E.g. in the Apocalypse of Moses 37:3, we read that when Adam died, “One of the six-winged seraphim came and carried Adam off to the Lake of Acheron and washed him three times in the presence of God.” He was then conducted to the third heaven (vs. 5-6) A similar idea is found in the Apocalypse of Peter, known from both Ethiopic and from a 5th century Greek text in the Bodelian Library. A portion of the Greek version was also found at Akhmim and is now called the Gizeh Manuscript. Though the latter breaks off before the others, the original text reads of the judgment day, when men are brought before God and receive a baptism in the “field of Akrosja” 16 Apparently deriving directly from the Apocolypse of Peter is the Apocalypse of Paul, of which there are versions in Coptic, Syriac, Ethiopic and Latin. In the story, Paul is taken by an angel and shown a lake situated before the heavenly city: And I said unto the angel: What is this? and he said unto me: This is the lake Acherusa where is the city of Christ: but not every man is suffered to enter into that city: for this is the way that leadeth unto God, and if any be a fornicator or ungodly, and turn and repent and bear fruits meet for repentance, first when he cometh out of the body he is brought and worshippeth God, and then by the commandment of the Lord he is delivered unto Michael the angel, and he washeth him in the lake Acherusa and so bringeth him into the city of Christ with them that have done no sin. 17 Prof. Hugh Nibley has dealt with the subject of baptism for the dead in Coptic pseudepigrapha, notably in the third century document known as Pistis Sophia. This esoteric work, describing the afterworld, notes: They will all test that soul to find their signs in it, as well as their seals and their baptisms and their anointing. And the virgin of the Light will seal that soul, and the workers will baptize it and give it the spiritual anointing. 18 Nibley further notes that the document speaks of how those who remain in the place of testing, the “in-between” place (i.e., the earth) should perform the ordinances of baptism, anointing and sealing for those who died without the opportunity to receive them in this life. 19 Another possible reference to baptism for the dead is in the Coptic Gospel of Philip, one of the documents found at Nag Hammadi in 1945. Here, we read that those who are baptized can become the servants of others, freeing them through the work of love that they, too, may enjoy the anointing at the hands of those who have received it. 20 The point Nibley repeated makes in regard to Coptic pseudepigrapha is that it is not only related to other early Christian literature, but that it is highly dependent upon earlier Christian texts. Concerning baptism for the dead, for example, he gives many references to water purification in ancient Egypt, both for the living and the dead. Indeed, washing in water was essential to the resurrection from the dead in ancient Egypt, just as baptism in the pseudopigraphal literature cited above. 21 Viewed in this light, one can see why the Copts, of all the early Christian churches, retained baptism for the dead 22. Some of the factors contributing to with ease with which they accepted this practice are as follows: 1. The general Egyptian view of the dead was that they continued to live on in spirit form, hopeful of the resurrection of the body. Great care was therefore taken to preserve the body through embalming and the building of rocky tombs. 2. There was great stress, in ancient Egypt, on the proper performance of rituals, both in the ancient world of the living and in the world of the dead. Even where the deceased had not lived a praiseworthy life, it was typical to ascribe to him righteousness and to deny any wrongdoing on his part. Lest his heart and other facets of his being betray him to the gods sitting in judgment in judgment on his spirit, magic rituals and talismans were employed to ensure safe passage into the worlds of glory. 3. Initiation, including water purification, was already extant in both earth life and in the mortuary rituals preceding burial. This was readily identified with Christian baptism for both living and dead. 4. The great honor and respect shown toward one’s ancestors in ancient Egypt was reflected in the building and maintenance of mortuary temples, where food and drink were brought for the spirit of the deceased and where rituals necessary for safe passage through the dangers of the afterlife were performed 23. With such and attitude toward one’s progenitors, it is little wonder that the Christianized Egyptians were happy to carry on the practice of proxy ordinances for those who had gone before. To these, we could add the notation that Gnosticism was common to both the Marcionites and to the early Christians of Egypt. With its heavy dependence on initiatory ceremonies, there was bound to be an attempt on the part of the Gnostic movement to impart these blessings to their honored dead. 24

We generally don't need our food supply in our 7 years of plenty, but will greatly regret not having it when we are in our 7 years of famine. Watch the new movie Contagion which will give you some perspective. While it is only a move, it does show how crazy things can get if something goes wrong.

Here are some GREAT articles showing the endowment to be ancient and to have *not* came from masonry. The Lord has said over and over that the endowment was "revealed" which means it didn't need to have been "borrowed" from anything. There is so much that is documented in ancient literature which shows the endowment to be ancient. The Israelite Temple and the Early Christians LDS Temple Endowment The Temple in Time and Eternity by Donald W. Parry, and Stephen D. Ricks Restoring the Ancient Church, Chapter 6 Early Christian and Jewish Rituals Related to Temple Practices

What exactly are his concerns? You may want to contact FAIR with his concerns, they specialize in answering questions which shake peoples faith Contacting FAIR