Mormon underwear? This can't be true...

[Alma]

OK, iconoclasts. I'm familiar with that theology. It was a mode of thought in the early church (I think around the 6th to 7th centuries). I guess it's still alive and kicking even after all these years.

I'm sorry, Magisterium, I didn't see your message until now. There were so many replies that I missed yours. I'm not an iconoclast. You're welcome to have icons to your heart's content, I wouldn't think of smashing them. I only speak for myself in why I believe the LDS Church doesn't make use of them as other Christians do. I don't even think that they are in themselves abominable.

Human beings are composite beings. That is to say, we are of spirit and flesh. When we worship, we need to engage both aspects of our being. Simply engaging our minds without the senses is incomplete. Complete immersion in worship and prayer is effected by the sights, and the "smells and bells".

I don't agree. I believe that this is precisely why the Lord forbade the manufacture of images anciently - and I don't believe the prohibition has been revoked. It seems to me that prayers to saints and the veneration of objects is clearly the reason God said, "Thou shalt not make unto the any graven image....thou shalt not bow thyself down to them nor serve them. I have seen many people bow themselves down to images of Christ and I personally believe that is prohibited when God forbids making images of anything in heaven above.

Of course, that's only my personal perspective and if you don't feel it applies, you're more than welcome to worship as you see fit.

Alma

 

[skylark1]

I just want to state that not all who display crosses as a symbol of the risen Christ venerate it, bow down to it, or pray to it. I do not direct my prayers to a cross, or even probably look at a cross when I pray.

 

[Fit4Christ]

The question isn't whether or not it's sacred but venerated as such. It simply isn't venerated. Perhaps its presence on the temple sanctifies it much as the altar sanctified the gifts in the temple anciently. You're really trying to find problems aren't you?

Alma

Happy took my next question, but I'm not trying to find problems. You had just made the comment that the lds doesn't use the cross or any other icon in their church. Moroni sure looks like it is from an outsider standpoint. I wanted to clarify whether you thought it was or not.

 

[JBucky]

Just as a side note to satisfy my curiousity....

I know what the term "the passion of Christ" means, but who intially coined it? Where did it come from?

 

[GOD'S ARMY]

Im sure our LDS friends would agree with that more or less.

I personally always thought that the cross was a symbol that more represented the "great apostasy" than Christ's passion/atonement. (In fact, before I became a Christian, I didn't even know it was called His "Passion".)

The cross is a symbol of the apostacy? Well I guess that gives us a better understanding of what you, yourself, believed when you were a member of the church. As for the "Passion" of Christ, you may not have known about it because it is only really referred to once.

Acts 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining http://scriptures.lds.org/acts/1/3c#3c to the kingdom of God:

 

[GOD'S ARMY]

Just as a side note to satisfy my curiousity....

I know what the term "the passion of Christ" means, but who intially coined it? Where did it come from?

Mel Gibson

 

[JBucky]

Oh, it's from Acts 1:3, thanks God's Army!

Why such a fuss over what the title of that "action"(for lack of a better term)? Why isn't "atonement" or "sufferings on the cross" good enough?

 

[unbound]

Whats wrong with all of you? I figured all you "anti-mormons" would have taken the opportunity to expound on the Masonic meanings behind the underwear symbols...You guys disappoint me.

 

[unbound]

An icon or symbol is simply a crux for ones faith. Not really a bad thing, but better if one doesnt need it.

LDS do love that one picture of Jesus gazing out across a city, is it Jerusalem? Its in almost every LDS's house I know.( Its even in mine, and Im not LDS, but I do kinda like that picture,anyway). Point is, we dont even know what Jesus looked like, pictures of him arent even accurate, but if it helps remind a person of Christ, then its not bad. However, this is not to be confused with "supernatural power to resist enemy" as some LDS think happens with the underwear.

 

[A New Dawn]

LDS purposefully do not use the cross. There reasoning is "if Jesus was killed with a gun, would you display a gun". They say they don't focus on his death but rather his ressurection and life and the cross is the symbol of his death.

This reasoning is not quite correct, if you go back to the original reason they started not using crosses. It is because the cross was originally the sign of the anti-christ. (A belief originally associated with the early reformation.)

 

[happyinhisgrace]

An icon or symbol is simply a crux for ones faith. Not really a bad thing, but better if one doesnt need it.

LDS do love that one picture of Jesus gazing out across a city, is it Jerusalem? Its in almost every LDS's house I know.( Its even in mine, and Im not LDS, but I do kinda like that picture,anyway). Point is, we dont even know what Jesus looked like, pictures of him arent even accurate, but if it helps remind a person of Christ, then its not bad. However, this is not to be confused with "supernatural power to resist enemy" as some LDS think happens with the underwear.

unbound, I don't view the cross as a crux for my faith. When I look at a cross, I think of my Lord and my God who suffered and died for my sin. It brings me back to what matters, it reminds me of my sin and how very loving and compassionate Jesus was to go through all he did, all for a sinner like me.

I look at a cross and I see love, devotion, compassion and what I feel is sadness, sorrow and at the same time, joy for a future in Heaven with that same God who did all those wonderful things for me.

 

[unbound]

This reasoning is not quite correct, if you go back to the original reason they started not using crosses. It is because the cross was originally the sign of the anti-christ. (A belief originally associated with the early reformation.)

There seems to be a complete reversal of symbols here. LDS claim the cross a is evil symbol, then they also claim the inverted pentagram is a christian symbol.

Its quite a shock when one drives up to the temple in Nauvoo, sees all those inverted petagrams around the top of it, then later learns that JS was into "folk magic". Wiccans also seem to love that symbol. Coincidence? Or is it one of the "hidden truths" of wicca?

 

[happyinhisgrace]

This reasoning is not quite correct, if you go back to the original reason they started not using crosses. It is because the cross was originally the sign of the anti-christ. (A belief originally associated with the early reformation.)

Do you have reference to the cross being orginally the sign of the anti-christ? Early Christians did not use the cross as a sign of the anti-christ.

 

[A New Dawn]

Do you have reference to the cross being orginally the sign of the anti-christ? Early Christians did not use the cross as a sign of the anti-christ.

From an article I read:

John revealed that the second beast would require its subjects to wear a mark in their hands and foreheads. The ancient pagans, fearful of evil spirits that might invade their bodies by creeping through the holes in their garments, which they called leg-holes, arm-holes, and neck-holes, wore amulets and charms at those openings to ward off the evil spirits. Our modern necklaces and bracelets are a carryover of that practice. As pagans converted to Christ, they retained their fear, believing that the devil might gain possession of their bodies through the same openings. Since they were forbidden to wear jewelry, they made the sign of the cross in those places. Tertullian wrote his wife, "Shall you escape notice when you sign your bed, [or] your body; when you blow away some impurity."(25) Elsewhere, he shows that the sign to which he referred was the sign of the cross. He said, "Now the Greek letter Tau and our own letter T is the very form of the cross, which he predicted would be the sign on our foreheads in the true Catholic Jerusalem."(26) During the Dark Ages, people revealed their Christian faith by making the sign of the cross over their foreheads. This remains a common practice today among Catholics today. Unable to mark themselves with the cross, those not Christians were not permitted to own property or trade anywhere in Christendom once the Papacy gained dominion. This fulfilled John's prophecy which described the power of the lamb with two horns in these words: "He causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads; and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark" (Rev 13:16-17). The reformers believed that the mark of the beast is the sign of the cross and even quoted one Roman Emperor's criticism of the practice: "They adored the wood of the cross, making its images on their foreheads."(27)

References:
25. Tertullian; To His Wife; Bk 2, Ch 5
26. Tertullian; Tertullian Against Marcion; Bk 3, Ch 22
27. Sir Isaac Newton; Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel, p 208

 

[unbound]

unbound, I don't view the cross as a crux for my faith. When I look at a cross, I think of my Lord and my God who suffered and died for my sin. It brings me back to what matters, it reminds me of my sin and how very loving and compassionate Jesus was to go through all he did, all for a sinner like me.

I look at a cross and I see love, devotion, compassion and what I feel is sadness, sorrow and at the same time, joy for a future in Heaven with that same God who did all those wonderful things for me.

It is good to reflect on what our salvation means. I think this is the main reason for communion. Christ said to do it in remembrance of him, and that the next time he drank the fruit of the vine would be with us in the New Jerusalem.

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

The cross is a symbol of the apostacy? Well I guess that gives us a better understanding of what you, yourself, believed when you were a member of the church.

Just me? Hmm.....

"In succeding centuries, the churches which came into being through an intermingling of pagan concepts with the true apostolic Christianity developed the practice of using symbolic crosses in the architecture of their buildings and as jewelry attached to the robes of their priests....All this is inharmonious with the quiet spirit of worship and reverence that should attend a true Christian's rememberance of our Lord's sufferings and death." (Mormon Doctrine, 172)

Gee, wonder where I got the idea?

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

From an article I read:

John revealed that the second beast would require its subjects to wear a mark in their hands and foreheads. The ancient pagans, fearful of evil spirits that might invade their bodies by creeping through the holes in their garments, which they called leg-holes, arm-holes, and neck-holes, wore amulets and charms at those openings to ward off the evil spirits. Our modern necklaces and bracelets are a carryover of that practice. As pagans converted to Christ, they retained their fear, believing that the devil might gain possession of their bodies through the same openings. Since they were forbidden to wear jewelry, they made the sign of the cross in those places. Tertullian wrote his wife, "Shall you escape notice when you sign your bed, [or] your body; when you blow away some impurity."(25) Elsewhere, he shows that the sign to which he referred was the sign of the cross. He said, "Now the Greek letter Tau and our own letter T is the very form of the cross, which he predicted would be the sign on our foreheads in the true Catholic Jerusalem."(26) During the Dark Ages, people revealed their Christian faith by making the sign of the cross over their foreheads. This remains a common practice today among Catholics today. Unable to mark themselves with the cross, those not Christians were not permitted to own property or trade anywhere in Christendom once the Papacy gained dominion. This fulfilled John's prophecy which described the power of the lamb with two horns in these words: "He causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads; and that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark" (Rev 13:16-17). The reformers believed that the mark of the beast is the sign of the cross and even quoted one Roman Emperor's criticism of the practice: "They adored the wood of the cross, making its images on their foreheads."(27)

References:
25. Tertullian; To His Wife; Bk 2, Ch 5
26. Tertullian; Tertullian Against Marcion; Bk 3, Ch 22
27. Sir Isaac Newton; Observations on the Prophecies of Daniel, p 208

May I say that that's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time. It's right up there with mormons being born with horns.

Dawn, you don't really believe that, right?

 

[Jason of Wyoming]

Yes I would consider the statue of Moroni to be an "icon" using one definition but I would not if using another. Random House defines it as:

"1. a picture, image, or other representation."

That's a good definition of the Moroni statues.

"2. Eastern Ch. a representation of some sacred personage, as Christ or a saint or angel, painted usually on a wood surface and venerated itself as sacred."

That is not.

Alma

Well....isn't the "priesthood garment" venerated as being sacred in and of itself? The marks make it holy, thus the command to cut the marks out when the garment is worn?

 

[CrownCaster]

Hey,
I heard somewhere that mormons in full fellowship or communion (or whatever it's called) are obliged to wear some kind of monogram on their underwear for some sort of spiritual identification purposes... Is this true, or just a rediculous rumor?

Having been LDS once I will explain this. They are called temple garments and are placed on you when you go through the temple for the first time. They are part of the covenant you make with God in the temple and have several marks that have specific meanings and are explained at a stage in the temple ceremony called the veil. They are mean to remind you of the things you did in the temple and offer protection to you throughout your life. Some LDS I have known swear that they have protected them physically. They actually are quite comfortable except in summer. The LDS people are to wear them at all times except during activities where they would not be prudent. They have changed in style since the early days from being wrist to ankle, one piece to now being below the knee for the bottoms (two piece now) and like a v-neck t-shirt with a little shorter of sleeves. They are not supposed to be seperated so like if you go swimming you dont just wear bottoms under your trunks but instead remove the entire thing but they are instructed to place them back on ASAP. Hope that helps.

 

[CrownCaster]

An icon or symbol is simply a crux for ones faith. Not really a bad thing, but better if one doesnt need it.

LDS do love that one picture of Jesus gazing out across a city, is it Jerusalem? Its in almost every LDS's house I know.( Its even in mine, and Im not LDS, but I do kinda like that picture,anyway). Point is, we dont even know what Jesus looked like, pictures of him arent even accurate, but if it helps remind a person of Christ, then its not bad. However, this is not to be confused with "supernatural power to resist enemy" as some LDS think happens with the underwear.

Yeah, I love that painting. It is called "O, Jerusalem, Jerusalem. It is such a wonderful picture.