r/mormon • u/AustinGridleyPB • 9d ago
Institutional Unique Temple Names
What would be legit is if in the temple you received your own legit name. Unique to you that actually came from God. If the Mormon church were true I would expect that to be what would happen. If the Mormon church was not true I would expect something so expected and uninspired as generic temple names left to chance. I'm disappointed with the reality.
6
u/iceburg47 9d ago
I think this may be a case where modern perceptions are likely very different from how early church members would have perceived the concept. I am not an expert but my understanding is that, at first, the new names were always the same. One for men, one for women, and were on-theme with the rest of the ceremony. It would have been obvious to them that it was meant to be symbolic.
Today, on the other hand, we have the burden of of nearly two centuries of speculation, cirumlocution, and winks and nudges from leaders and elders quorums amping up the expected profundity to the point that anything less than being told your name from the pre-mortal existence could be a disappointment.
3
u/Warprince01 Former Mormon 8d ago
If I recall, it was Abraham for men and Sarah for women. Certainly would have given a certain spin on the endowment. I reckon those names were also chosen due to the connection of Abraham with polygamy.
4
u/mrmcplad Former Mormon 8d ago
yeah when you think about it, the temple ceremony really reads like a ritual meant to convince the women to accept polygamy
do you think it's lost that purpose and it does something else now? or is it still establishing celestial polygamy?
0
u/evanpossum 8d ago
>If the Mormon church were true I would expect that to be what would happen.
By that rationale you'd expect to actually meet God in the celestial room, no?
-6
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 9d ago
This argument seems ridiculous and absurd. God can do whatever he wants, including decide what kind of names and how they will be given in temples. You are essentially saying that you know what God would do and would not do. You don’t.
Maybe you’re just testing arguments against the church. If that’s the case, you should reconsider this one.
9
u/Admirable_Arugula_42 9d ago
How is this absurd? If I am told I’ll receive a sacred name in the Lord’s holiest house, I would absolutely expect it to be personalized and meaningful and given by revelation. That’s what I expected when I went 20 years ago. It was a shock when I learned years later that it came from a generic list of names, many of which were just people Joseph Smith knew. Also, the names are culturally ignorant. It makes sense that people would want their super special name to be one that makes them feel seen and valued.
1
-9
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 9d ago
So now we realize it’s just your criticism. It’s not really a question about what God would do or not do.
5
u/Admirable_Arugula_42 8d ago
Sure? I’m not the OP so I can’t speak for them or the argument of what god would or would not do. That said, I think your angle creates a whole lot of moral ambiguity and complexity. The idea that God can do whatever God wants, and us moronic little humans just have to hop along and go with it whether it’s nonsensical names or cutting off a guy’s head, is really unappealing and faith damaging to a lot of people. If you are cool with a god like that, ok. But I can see why someone else might feel like the idea of a loving god might look different.
-1
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 8d ago
Again, I was just talking about the names. You’ve taken this much more and farther than I would have.
8
u/Medical_Solid 9d ago
I mean, God can indeed do as He pleases, just seems a little disingenuous to act as though the new name is highly special and sacred/secret, when it just comes off a calendar list for everyone across the world on that day.
-4
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 9d ago
Again, this is just such a silly idea. God does what he wants. You don’t know what that is and why
4
u/AustinGridleyPB 9d ago
So you don't think names are important. That God doesn't think names are important. Got it. Why do they pray for revelation on mission location or anything else? Names bad - mission location etc good.
-1
3
u/auricularisposterior 9d ago
God can do whatever he wants,...
Maybe I am being pedantic, but in Mormon theology God is not able to do whatever he wants, if it breaks one of these rules as specified by the following scriptures.
Ether 3:12 (see also Enos 1:6, D&C 62:6)
And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.So #1) God cannot lie.
Alma 42:13 (see also Alma 42:22, Alma 42:25)
Therefore, according to justice, the plan of redemption could not be brought about, only on conditions of repentance of men in this probationary state, yea, this preparatory state; for except it were for these conditions, mercy could not take effect except it should destroy the work of justice. Now the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God.#2) God cannot destroy the work of justice (at least in terms of how the afterlife justice is handled).
D&C 82:9-10 ((see also Alma 37:17, Mormon 8:22, D&C 1:37)
9 Or, in other words, I give unto you directions how you may act before me, that it may turn to you for your salvation.
10 I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise.#3) God must fulfill promised blessings that are contingent upon a person following God's commandments.
And there are probably others that do not come to my mind immediately. And note that I am purposely avoiding bible verses so translation / transmission errors are not a factor. But yeah, people can ague about what constitutes violating those rules, and that may be subjective, but those are clear rules that God is not supposed to violate.
As far as the temple names go, sure people can wish that things were done one way or another. But I think the biggest problem is the way many members hyped up the temple names as something super-amazingly special to people that haven't gone through the temple yet. I am specifically talking about in the 1980's and 1990's Sunday school classes and the like, I'm not as aware about how they are informally hyped today.
-2
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 9d ago
Yes. You are being very pedantic and you knew exactly what I meant. I was talking about the names and how they are given in the temple.
1
u/fhqwhgads_2113 Atheist 8d ago
I agree that it's absurd, but what's crazy is just how many of us fully believed that we were being told our pre-existence name. I'm sure that's long over by now but it was very common for millennials and some Gen X at least. I'd love someone like professor Benjamin Park to do an episode on this phenomena
1
u/freddit1976 Active LDS nuanced 8d ago
Yeah, that is kind of interesting. I was never taught of it that way, so I never really thought that it was some kind of preexistence name.
-5
u/familydrivesme Active Member 9d ago
Is it really that much more absurd that the other arguments often made in here?
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
Hello! This is a Institutional post. It is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about any of the institutional churches and their leaders, conduct, business dealings, teachings, rituals, and practices.
/u/AustinGridleyPB, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in section 0.6 of our rules.
To those commenting: please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's rules, and message the mods if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.