First of all, Cheryl is a fantastic guest and her book is one of my favorites. In regards to the ancient origins of Freemasonry, I do not dispute that the current Masonic organization(s) are not as ancient as once believed. However, the esoteric and gnostic traditions, knowledge and symbols are ancient indeed.
@@GospelTangentsmaybe but her quote that I’m referring to is at the 12:35 point in the video when she references the people of the Book of Mormon building not a Christian temple, but a Masonic temple. I’ll say it again, I have never heard that idea before.
This isn't a quick answer, but I think you are misinterpreting her comments. Since masonry didn't exist until the Middle Ages, it seems really unlikely that Nephites were Masons. This gets into Joseph Smith's role in the translation process. While there is the one extreme for those who think the Book of Mormon came from Joseph Smith's mind (for example Alexander Campbell said the BoM tackles all the 19th century controversies of the day: infant baptism, transubstantiation, etc), there are others who think Joseph was involved in the translation process. A biblical example would be the word "unicorns" in the Bible. While there is no such thing as a unicorn, the biblical translators did the best they could when it came to an unknown word. Unicorns could be a word translators used to describe a rhinocerous, a single-horned animal. Did Joseph do the same sorts of things? There are no horses in the Americas prior to Columbus, so pro-Church apologists have said that Joseph used the word horses in the same way unicorns is used in the Bible. So, the idea is that Joseph was quite familiar with masonry. So when describing a Nephite temple, he used masonic terms to describe a Nephite temple because Joseph was more familiar with masonic temples than Jewish temples. This assumes a "loose" translation method rather than a "tight" translation method. Tight translation makes it harder to describe anachronisms (like horses, masonic temples) than loose translation which says Joseph used terms he was familiar with, even if they may not have existed in the Book of Mormon timeline. So, that's what I think Cheryl was getting at. She wasn't saying the Nephites were familiar with freemasonry, because that would be like saying the Nephites used cell phones. Clearly that didn't happen. But to explain a communication device (or in this case a Nephite temple), Joseph would have used a cell phone (or masonic imagery in this case) to describe a temple in words he understood well. Does that make sense? If you'd like more info on tight vs loose translation, see some of my other videos on BoM translation.
Thanks so much for the response. I totally get it and the loose translation model is really the only one that makes sense to me. I love the Book of Mormon but to say that Joseph didn’t have a major part in its story to me is silly. I love your channel. Thanks again!
@@eldertibbs There was a trend in 19th century freemasonry that the patriarchs of the bible were Freemasons themselves, going back to Adam, and that "true" Freemasonry existed in dispensations throughout history. This trend mirrored the Apostasy > Restoration cycle that JS emphasized in the foundations of the LDS church, which continues into church teachings today. The BOM has pretty heavy Masonic themes (Solomon's temple, secret combinations, signs and tokens, "lambskin" aprons, etc.) JS's lumped the restoration of Freemasonry together with the restoration of the Gospel and, to most early church members, the two couldn't be separated, hence the Masonic themes in the LDS temple ritual. It's then logical to see the Masonic themes in the BOM in the same light that JS and early church members interpreted them, specifically the inseparable link between the gospel and freemasonry. I don't think it's a stretch that the temples in the BOM are Masonic temples.
Cheryl Bruno is the best!
She is a great guest. I enjoyed her thoughts and knowledge of these events.
First of all, Cheryl is a fantastic guest and her book is one of my favorites.
In regards to the ancient origins of Freemasonry, I do not dispute that the current Masonic organization(s) are not as ancient as once believed. However, the esoteric and gnostic traditions, knowledge and symbols are ancient indeed.
But Joseph believed free masonry was ancient and was"restoring" free masonry. The endowment is not based on gnostic or esoteric traditions.
Hey man this was a good interview. No bad vibes, appreciate it.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thanks!
Thank you!!!
I’m curious about this claim that the Nephites were practicing Freemasonry and even built a Masonic temple. I’ve never heard that before.
I don't think that's what was said. I think you are overstating what was said.
@@GospelTangentsmaybe but her quote that I’m referring to is at the 12:35 point in the video when she references the people of the Book of Mormon building not a Christian temple, but a Masonic temple. I’ll say it again, I have never heard that idea before.
This isn't a quick answer, but I think you are misinterpreting her comments. Since masonry didn't exist until the Middle Ages, it seems really unlikely that Nephites were Masons.
This gets into Joseph Smith's role in the translation process. While there is the one extreme for those who think the Book of Mormon came from Joseph Smith's mind (for example Alexander Campbell said the BoM tackles all the 19th century controversies of the day: infant baptism, transubstantiation, etc), there are others who think Joseph was involved in the translation process.
A biblical example would be the word "unicorns" in the Bible. While there is no such thing as a unicorn, the biblical translators did the best they could when it came to an unknown word. Unicorns could be a word translators used to describe a rhinocerous, a single-horned animal.
Did Joseph do the same sorts of things? There are no horses in the Americas prior to Columbus, so pro-Church apologists have said that Joseph used the word horses in the same way unicorns is used in the Bible.
So, the idea is that Joseph was quite familiar with masonry. So when describing a Nephite temple, he used masonic terms to describe a Nephite temple because Joseph was more familiar with masonic temples than Jewish temples. This assumes a "loose" translation method rather than a "tight" translation method. Tight translation makes it harder to describe anachronisms (like horses, masonic temples) than loose translation which says Joseph used terms he was familiar with, even if they may not have existed in the Book of Mormon timeline.
So, that's what I think Cheryl was getting at. She wasn't saying the Nephites were familiar with freemasonry, because that would be like saying the Nephites used cell phones. Clearly that didn't happen. But to explain a communication device (or in this case a Nephite temple), Joseph would have used a cell phone (or masonic imagery in this case) to describe a temple in words he understood well. Does that make sense?
If you'd like more info on tight vs loose translation, see some of my other videos on BoM translation.
Thanks so much for the response. I totally get it and the loose translation model is really the only one that makes sense to me. I love the Book of Mormon but to say that Joseph didn’t have a major part in its story to me is silly. I love your channel. Thanks again!
@@eldertibbs There was a trend in 19th century freemasonry that the patriarchs of the bible were Freemasons themselves, going back to Adam, and that "true" Freemasonry existed in dispensations throughout history. This trend mirrored the Apostasy > Restoration cycle that JS emphasized in the foundations of the LDS church, which continues into church teachings today. The BOM has pretty heavy Masonic themes (Solomon's temple, secret combinations, signs and tokens, "lambskin" aprons, etc.)
JS's lumped the restoration of Freemasonry together with the restoration of the Gospel and, to most early church members, the two couldn't be separated, hence the Masonic themes in the LDS temple ritual.
It's then logical to see the Masonic themes in the BOM in the same light that JS and early church members interpreted them, specifically the inseparable link between the gospel and freemasonry. I don't think it's a stretch that the temples in the BOM are Masonic temples.