John 21 - Miraculous Draught of Fish

"The Miraculous Draught of Fishes" by Sebiastiano Ricci, circa 1695-1697, 

oil on canvas, The Detroit Institute of Arts

In John 21:1-14 the apostle John relates his experience of  when he, Peter, James, Thomas and Nathaniel spent a night of fruitless fishing along the shore of the Sea of Galilee following the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Toward morning the apostles saw a man standing on shore who called to them asking if they had caught any fish. After answering in the negative the man then instructed them to cast their net one more time on the right side of their boat. After doing so the fishermen caught a "multitude of fishes".

It was at this point that John and the other disciples realized that the man onshore was the Savior and after dragging the net to land they proceed to count the number of fish which turned out to be 153. John also points out that despite the large number of fish the net was not broken.

Stained glass depiction

 of St. John at St. Matthew's

 German Evangelical 

Lutheran Church in 

Charleston, 

South Carolina.

The question as to why John would include the exact number of fish in the net has been debated for centuries and no consensus has ever been found. Some have asserted that he included the number to show just how large the haul was to emphasize the miraculous nature of the occurrence. Jerome cites the Roman teacher Oppian who wrote that there were 153 species of fish in the world and contends that John included this number to teach that the gospel was for all the world and to illustrate the inclusivity of Christianity. He makes this argument despite the fact that Oppian lived and wrote more than a century after the time of Jesus, and thus could not have been an influence on the apostle.

An additional explanation has been proposed which looks at Hebrew gematria relationships, especially the phrase "sons of God" (בני האלהים - beni ha-elohim) whose numerical value is 153. The proponents of this idea theorize that John included the fish count to show that the chosen sons of God were to be gathered into the gospel net through the preaching of John and his fellow apostles. This explanation seems plausible and if true it would be helpful to discover what the phrase may have meant to John and his contemporaries.

The Yale Anchor Bible Dictionary (hereafter YABD) explains under the entry "Sons of God" that "The designation 'sons (son) of God' occurs in the OT in three clearly definable categories depending on whether it refers (1) to divine or angelic beings; (2) to Israelites or Israel as a whole; or (3) individually to the king." 

Following the exile and during the intertestamental period the term began to be used mostly to denote chosen Israel. The YABD entry contains a fascinating discussion of how the "sons of God" phrase was utilized in the sacred literature of the period:

“Son(s) of God” (or its equivalent) becomes virtually a synonym for “people of God” (= Israel), while the OT associations of election, closeness to God, and special protection continue. The ethical aspect of the sonship metaphor also continues (Add Esth 16:14–16; Pss. Sol. 17:30; L.A.B. 16:5), often associated with the idea of disciplinary chastisement (Wis 12:20–21; 16:10–11; Pss. Sol. 18:4).
 
A fresh development, however, is the considerable frequency with which the motif occurs in eschatological contexts. This suggests that it was an epithet felt to be particularly apt to describe the ideal Israel of the end time, the holy and purified people of God, destined to possess or actually in possession of the blessings of salvation (Jub. 1:25–28; Pss. Sol. 17:30; Sib. Or. 3:702–4; 5:248–50). Frequently, acknowledgment of sonship suggests the idea of rescue from or immunity to death. Connected with this is a widespread tendency in the intertestamental period to characterize the future awaiting the righteous as a restoration of the angel-like immunity to death enjoyed by human beings before the fall (1 En. 69:11; 2 En. 30:11; Wis 1:13–14), along with other angelic characteristics and privileges such as a shining countenance, vision of God, and presence at the heavenly liturgy (Wis 5:5; 2 Bar. 51:3–12; Pr. Jos. A). The combination of these motifs in the eschatology of several texts suggests a conflation in the later period of the formerly separate categories of “Israelite” and “heavenly being (angelic)” divine sonship (Byrne 1979). (linked added)

During the New Testament era the YABD states that the phrase "sons of God" was used by the early Christians to refer to the community of believers who followed the fledgling Christian movement while also retaining the eschatological context which was a distinguishing characteristic of the post exile period. 

Whether John was utilizing gematria or not will probably never be known for sure but in the absence of a better explanation it seems like the most likely possibility.

Genesis 32 - Jacob's Wrestle

Jacob Wrestling With The Angel by Gustave Dore.

One of the most puzzling stories found in the Old Testament (aka Hebrew Bible) is the story related in Genesis 32: 22-30 about Jacob's contest with the "man" (איש - 'ish).

The story begins with Jacob and several of his family crossing the Jabbok River at night. Jacob  for some reason is left alone and then begins wrestling with the aforementioned man which continues until the break of dawn at which time the man bestows a new name and blessing upon the head of Jacob after realizing that he is unable to defeat him.

The identity of the "man" is not explicity stated in the text but verse 30 implies that the "man" may have been God himself since Jacob declares at the conclusion of the account that he had seen him. Other possibilities have been explored as noted by Esther Hamori in the introduction to her book When Gods Were Men where she states: "The figure defined as an 'ish who wrestles with Jacob (Genesis 32:23-33) has been identified in modern scholarship as an angel, a demon, a man, God, and various other alternatives" (1). Rabbi Louis Ginzberg's compilation of aggadah in his work the Legends of the Jews states that it was the archangel Michael who wrestled with Jacob and Josephus agrees it was an angel but does not provide a name.

Assuming the figure was a heavenly one it seems inconceivable that the wrestling match would last more than just a few seconds or that Jacob would be able to wrestle the being to a stand still. There are elements of the account that suggest there was more going on than is immediately apparent. In verse 24 the word "wrestled" is translated from אבק (abaq) the definition of which is given by Strong as "A primitive root; probably to float away (as vapor)... to bedust, that is grapple: - wrestle". The reason that the concepts of dust and vapor are linked with wrestling in Biblical Hebrew is that when two individuals wrestled they kicked up a significant amount of dust into the air and became covered in the substance themselves. The author of this account may have used this terminology to conceal what was really happening. The imagery of floating away as vapor is reminiscent of Nephi's description of being carried away in the spirit in 1 Nephi 11:1 and the description of Moses being caught away in Moses 1:1. Additionally, we learn from Moses in the Pearl of Great Price that part of Enoch's vision entailed being clothed upon with glory (see Moses 7:3-4). The imagery of being covered in dust as a result of wrestling may have been intended to invoke this idea.


In verses 27-28 of Genesis 32 after requesting a blessing from the heavenly ministrant Jacob is given the new name of Israel which can be translated as one who prevails with God. Receipt of a new name was a feature of some ancient coronation rituals. The image to the right shows two of the names for Pharaoh Tutankhamun - his birth name and his regnal name. At his birth he was named Tutankhaten (which means "living image of Aten") but subsequently changed it to Tutankhamun ("living image of Amun) on account of pressures to disavow his predecessors policy of worshipping Aten to the exclusion of the rest of the Egyptian pantheon. The cartouche on the left bears the name Tutankhamun. The cartouche on the right bears his regnal name which he assumed at his coronation at the age of nine years. His royal name was Nebkheperure ("Lord of the forms of Re).

Additionally, we know that several of the kings of Judah were given royal names upon their ascension to the throne. That list includes, but is not limited to the following:

• Eliakim became Jehoiakim
• Jeconiah became Jehoiachin
• Mattaniah became Zedekiah

Therefore, Jacob's receipt of a new name may be an indication that this account is to be understood in the context of a coronation. This is reinforced by the fact that Jacob is also called a "prince" (שרה - sarah) by the heavenly messenger.

There is one last element in the account which has caused a great deal of debate among Bible scholars and that is when the man touches Jacob's thigh and it becomes disjointed. In verse 32 the Biblical writer mentions that the Israelites of his day did not eat the corresponding sinew on the animals which were used for food in commemoration of this event. The sinew was emblematic of a person's strength and vigor. Saying that the heavenly messenger put his sinew out of joint may have been a way of saying that Jacob's strength was spent by his encounter with the divine.

It is common for those who commune with divine beings to have their strength exhausted by the experience. Moses experienced this in his great theophany (see Moses 1:9-10) as did Joseph Smith in his encounter with the resurrected Moroni (see JS-H 1:48).

Another possibility is that this part of the story refers to another element of Near-eastern ritual. New Kingdom temple rituals were designed to guide the Pharaoh and other high officials through the hazards of the underworld and into the presence of Osiris. This is illustrated beautifully in the papyrus of the scribe of Hunefer found in the British Museum.

In the papyrus, the initiate (in this case Hunefer's scribe, in white) is required to answer the questions posed by numerous divine beings along the top of the papyrus. They ask questions of him to determine his worthiness to proceed along his path. In the lower portion of the image he is taken by the hand of Anubis who guides him to a scale where his heart is weighed against the feather of Maat which represents truth. Having passed the test he is brought before the partition separating him from Osiris by Horus where he enters the presence of Osiris and himself becomes an Osiris for eternity.

As the initiate passed through the partition or veil to join with Osiris he was welcomed by a ritual embrace. A representation of this is found on the back side of the holy of holies in the Karnak Temple in Luxor, Egypt. The picture to the left was taken by me when I visited the Karnak Temple in 1999. While it is damaged it is possible to see the ritual embrace of the initiate on the left and the deity on the right.

Clearer images of the ritual embrace can be found in Nibley's book The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri, an Egyptian Endowment on page 431 (see below).  Regarding this image Nibley wrote:

"The climax and culmination of the coronation rites was a ritual embrace of father and son designated as shn, the word becoming a terminus technicus for the coronation itself... The shn-rite was taken over from the coronation into the funerary rites, but in either sphere it deals with the embracing of an otherworldly father" (430-1).

This ritual embrace may be alluded to in verse 25 of Genesis 32. Just as the initiate in Egyptian temple rituals was welcomed into the presence of deity following their successful completion of certain tests (or might we say contests?) so Jacob may have experienced something similar in his diving encounter near the Jabbok River.

The description from Nibley's book reads as follows: "Figure 136. (B) The four sides of an eleven-foot pillar, one of eight from the jubilee chapel of Senwosret, show the pharaoh being embraced by four different gods in four different ways, just as the accompanying inscriptions are similar but never the same. Thus the divine family welcomes their son back home. Senwsret I pillar, ca. 1940 B.C. Courtesy of Cairo Museum."

Uzziah the King-Priest

Currently I am slowly making my way through Margaret Barker's most recent book The Mother of the Lord Volume 1: The Lady in the Temple where she makes an interesting assertion which I wanted to note here.

In several of her books she argues that the ancient Israelite kings were also Melchizedek priests who were adherents of a more ancient tradition than the one that is dominantly portrayed in the Bible. Sometime in the 8th century BC a movement lead by a group scholars have named the "Deuteronomists" redacted the Hebrew Bible and "cleansed" the older tradition of elements they disagreed with. They emphasized the Mosaic tradition, were hostile to the monarchy and promoted the power of the Aaronic priesthood.

The King Uzziah Stricken with Leprosy, byRembrandt, 1635.

One of the kings of Judah during this time was named Uzziah (aka Azariah). 2 Chronicles 26 records that Uzziah clashed with the Aaronite priests (led by the high priest, also named Azariah) on one occasion when he entered the temple to offer incense.

Barker suggests that this clash had to do with the ongoing power struggle between the traditional Melchizedek priest-kings and their Aaronic priest rivals. This is what she says on page 90:

"Did the conflict with Azariah the priest mark the moment when the older royal priesthood lost its power to the rising influence of Deuteronomy, Moses and the Aaronites? Was this the moment when Wisdom and the older ways began to fade from Jerusalem and to be replaced by exclusive emphasis on the Law (Deut 4.6)?...

"According to the Chronicler, Uzziah entered the temple to burn incense and was pursued by Azariah the high priest and 80 warrior priests - 'men of valour' (2 Chron. 26.17). This was a major confrontation over the roles of the chief priests and the king, since Azariah claimed that only the sons of Aaron could burn incense (2 Chron. 26.18)."

William Hamblin On the Esoteric

Last week the Deseret News published a column by Bill Hamblin and Dan Peterson on the esoteric in religion. It is very interesting and well worth reading. You can read the column by clicking here.

2013 "Lady of the Temple" Conference

Some exciting news was announced this morning by the Academy for Temple Studies. Pasted below is the announcement they emailed out this morning:

"The Academy for Temple Studies and the Utah State University Religious Studies program announce a conference we believe may be of interest to you, to be held on Wednesday, October 23, 2013, on the campus of Utah State University.  We invite you to save the date.

"THE LADY OF THE TEMPLE:  EXAMINING THE DIVINE FEMININE IN THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN TRADITION

"Registration for the day-long conference will be $50.00. Students with a valid student ID will be admitted for $10.00.
 

"Seating will be limited.

"You can register on-line at this link. https://secureinstantpayments.com/sip/cart/event.php?EID=1003"

 The impressive line up of speakers includes the following:

• Margaret Barker
• Laurence Hemming
• Bill Dever
• Alyson Von Feldt
• Valerie Hudson

The Mysteries of Solomon's Temple

This past weekend Professor Bill Hamblin gave a fireside presentation entitled "The Mysteries of Solomon's Temple". Here is a link to a copy of the slides from his presentation.

Noah

The Lord Fulfilleth All His Words, by Clark Kelley Price

The account of the prophet Noah as found in Genesis is a fascinating and generally misunderstood pericope which is highly symbolic and recapitulates the story of the creation and the fall. Jeffrey Bradshaw has written some very insightful material on the symbols behind the Noah story which can be found in his books and in  Meridian Magazine. Bradshaw points out a number of parallels between the creation story and the flood. In this post I will mention just a few for the sake of brevity. Additionally, Bradshaw sheds light upon the troubling story of Noah's drunkenness which seems out of character for a prophet of God. As we will see this account as it has come down to us has been subject to misunderstandings and mistranslations and when understood properly does not need to cause concern.

Creation

Ancient Hebrews conceived of the existence of a primordial sea of chaos out of which creation emerged. According to this conception the first piece of ground to emerge from chaos was the primordial hillock. Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, upon which the 1st and 2nd temples were built, was associated with this primordial hillock by the Israelites. The primordial hillock was also associated with the Garden of Eden and was considered the axis mundi or the point at which heaven and earth were joined.

Bradshaw writes that the ark built by Noah was designed as a temple with its three decks corresponding to the three areas (most holy place, holy place and outer court) of the Jerusalem temple. He also points out that other than the tabernacle and temple the ark is the only structure mentioned in the Bible whose design was revealed through revelation. 

Genesis 8 states that after drifting across the water the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. Ararat is depicted as the primordial mountain upon which the ark/temple rests just as the temple sat upon Mount Moriah. The animals and Noah's family leaving the ark to re-populate the earth can be likened to the placing of animals and man on the earth at the creation. Upon leaving the ark the command to "multiply and replenish the earth" was renewed with Noah and his family as it was originally given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. (compare Gen. 1:28 & Gen 8:17)

Noah's Tent

The story of Noah's drunkenness within his tent is found in Genesis 9:20-27 and many have supposed this incident to be a moment of indiscretion by an otherwise righteous prophet. However, there may be more to the story than is suggested by our modern English translations of the Bible. Bradshaw cites the writings of Rabbi Shim'on in the Zohar where he explains that Noah's tent is to be understood as the tent of the Shekinah or the Divine Presence of Jehovah. This tent, built at the foot of Mount Ararat, therefore, is analogous to the portable Tabernacle which Moses built at the foot of Mount Sinai. (ref)

Tissot, Noah in Vision

What, then are we make of Noah's being drunken and uncovered in the tent? Bradshaw mentions a statement attributed to Joseph Smith in which the prophet explained that Noah was not drunk but was in a vision. Bradshaw's article also cites the Genesis Apocryphon which describes Noah and his family engaging in a ritual drinking of wine after which Noah is shown a vision in which he sees the destiny of his posterity. Therefore, as Bradshaw explains "Noah's drinking of the wine should be seen in a ritual context and not merely as a spontaneous indulgence that occurred at the end of a particularly wearying day." (ref)

Noah's nakedness can be explained by looking at the example of Saul when he joined Samuel's group and "stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night." (1 Sam. 19:24) Bradshaw cites Robert Jamieson who explained that Saul's nakedness in this instance means that he was “divested of his armor and outer robes." (ref)

Hugh Nibley has offered another explanation that the nakedness of Noah referred to the priestly garment which he wore which was the garment of skins given to Adam which had been passed down through the generations. Nibley goes on to explain that Ham either stole the garment from Noah or made a copy of it. (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.5, pp. 169-170). If this was the case then it would appear that Ham was cursed because he intruded into the sanctuary tent while his father was enwrapped in vision dressed in his priestly vestments. Ham then made an unauthorized copy of the garment and claimed priestly authority by virtue of possessing the counterfeit. 

Understanding the account of Noah in light of the information Jeff Bradshaw has gathered  brings greater appreciation for this story and dispels the more controversial aspects. Additionally, viewing this account in light of the temple creation drama helps the reader understand the account as it was intended to be understood.

Jachin and Boaz

Model of Solomon's temple showing the two pillars,
Jachin and Boaz.

One feature of the temple of Solomon was a set of brass pillars which sat in the ulam (אוּלם) or porch of the temple at the entrance to the holy place. These pillars were known as Jachin and Boaz and there has been a great deal of discussion about the purpose and meaning of the two columns. A description of Jachin and Boaz can be found in 1 Kings 7:13-22 which lists the following characteristics:

- Each was made of cast bronze by Phoenician craftsmen.

- Each were 18 cubits high and 12 cubits in circumference.

- Each was topped with a capital made of cast bronze 5 cubits high and decorated with a pomegranate and lotus motif.

Several theories have been put forth to explain the meaning of the pillars. Margaret Barker has written the following:

"Some have suggested that the pillars represented sacred trees, fertility symbols. There are stylized trees standing on either side of the entrance on several models of shrines which have been unearthed. Another possibility is that they were fire altars, or that they represented the pillar of fire and the pillar of cloud which led the Israelites in the desert." (Barker, Gate of Heaven p.29-30)

Matthew Brown has suggested the pillars represented the king and the Lord and has cited numerous passages from the scriptures to support this idea. (Brown, Gate of Heaven p.117-119)

Another possibility is that the pillars were analogous to the stone obelisks that stood at the entrances to Egyptian temples.

Entrance to the Luxor temple in Upper Egypt. Originally two obelisks stood at the entrance. The other is now located in the Place de la Concorde in Paris, France.

This idea was suggested by Flinders Petrie (ref) and seems possible in light of the close cultural affinity which ancient Israel shared with its neighbor. If this is the case then examining what the obelisks represented to the Egyptians may shed some light on the meaning of Jachin and Boaz.

Obelisks were associated with the sun by the Egyptians and were thought to represent the petrified rays of Aten. The pylons which stand behind the obelisks represented the hills between which the sun rose and represented the horizon. The hieroglyph for the word "horizon" was a depiction of the sun rising between the hills (see below) and could also be translated as "mountain of light". (ref)

In ancient Israel the horizon was connected with the concept of eternity (עולם - olam in Hebrew). The place beyond the horizon was distant and hidden just as eternity was. (ref) The holy place and most holy place in the temple represented this distant, hidden place where God's abode was located. Crossing the threshold from the courtyard into the holy place was crossing from profane to sacred space. Likewise in Egyptian temples. The two pillars were located in the porch or אוּלם (ulam) of the temple. This may have been word play with olam (eternity) as the two words are very similar. Therefore, it seems reasonable to suppose that the two bronze pillars, Jachin and Boaz symbolized the horizon, or the barrier between the temporal world and the eternal world just as the obelisks and pylons did in Egyptian temples.

The Pharisee and the Publican

Recently I re-read the parable found in Luke 18:10-14 commonly known as the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. It is far and away my favorite parable out of the many found in the New Testament. It makes me think that perhaps I have a chance after all. Here it is:

Luke 18:10-14

 10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

  

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

  

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

  

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

  

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

BYU New Testament Commentary

Quote from the BYU New Testament Commentary Website:

A group of Latter-day Saint scholars has joined forces to produce a multi-volume commentary on the New Testament along with a new rendition of the Greek New Testament texts. Planned to take several years to complete, this  series will combine the best of ancient linguistic and historical scholarship with Latter-day Saint doctrinal perspectives. 

The first volume is scheduled for release this coming summer and will cover the book of Revelation. Looks very cool. Can't wait to get my hands on a copy.

Dead Sea Scrolls coming to The Leonardo

According to KSL the greatest archaeological discovery of the 20th Century is coming to a museum near near you (that is, if you live in the intermountain west)! The Leonardo Museum in Salt Lake City has announced they will be showcasing some of the scrolls along with several hundred other artifacts from the Holy Land sometime in the near future. I had the opportunity to visit the Shrine of the Book in Jerusalem a number of years ago and see many of the scrolls. I look forward to seeing them again. For more information visit KSL.com

Don Bradley

LDS scholar Don Bradley has an interesting story to tell. His studies of the history of the Church led him out of the Church into atheism and back again. He is now working as one of the editors for the Joseph Smith Papers Project and is finishing up a masters degree in history at Utah State University. Currently, he is working on a book about the lost 116 pages of the Book of Mormon and from what he has spoken about regarding his research the book sounds as though it will be a fascinating read.

Several months ago he sat down for a lengthy interview with the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR). The interview is long but is well worth listening to. It can be downloaded here or on iTunes by subscribing to FAIR's podcast.

Last summer the Salt Lake Tribune ran a story featuring Bradley. The story briefly relates his journey out of the Church and how he found his way back in, but leaves out a lot of the information the FAIR interview covers. The article can be viewed by clicking here.

At the 2012 FAIR conference he delivered a talk entitled "Piercing the Veil: Temple Worship in the Lost 116 Pages." Read his address here.

Lastly, his Sunstone Symposium address can be listened to here.

Jeff Bradshaw



Yesterday afternoon I stopped by Benchmark Books and picked up Jeff Bradshaw's commentary on the book of Moses entitled "In God's Image and Likeness: Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Book of Moses".

I spent a couple hours reading it yesterday and was not disappointed. I have heard him speak a few times and since becoming aware of him have been very impressed by his insights and scholarship. On the sidebar of this blog I have a link to a list of articles he has written for Meridian Magazine. I have read most of them and highly reccomend taking the time to read them carefully.

If Jeff Bradshaw's Moses commentary is out of your price range he has written a couple other books that are reasonably priced including: "Temple Themes in the Book of Moses" and "Temple Themes in the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood".

Several months ago he spoke at the "Temple on Mount Zion Conference" in Provo. His talk was entitled: "The Ark and the Tent: Symbolism in the Story of Noah". The talk is recorded and can be viewed here. As a caveat I need to warn you that watching him speak is a little like drinking from a fire hose. I always need to pause and rewind to digest what he is saying - it is fascinating.

Ancient and Modern Temple Parallels

This weekend I put together this short video pointing out a parallel between ancient and modern temples. I hope you enjoy it.

The Creation and the Temple

In the video above you will notice that each day of creation is associated with a different furnishing of the temple. Regarding this Margaret Barker (on page three of her paper Creation Theology) has stated:

The Temple was a model of the creation, and the liturgy of the temple preserved the creation.Genesis 1 was not an account of the historical process of creation, but a record of the great vision granted to Moses and others of how the world is made. In the six days when Moses was on Sinai, before the LORD called to him (Exod. 24.16), he saw the six days of creation, and was then told to replicate these when he built the tabernacle. A few ancient sources say that Moses saw the heavenly temple; but most assume that he saw the process of creation, and that the tabernacle represented this. Ancient material such as this is sometimes difficult to read, but the last section of Exodus 40, describing how Moses assembled the tabernacle, corresponds well to the days described in Genesis 1.

To read the paper in it's entirety go here.

According to Margaret Barker the days of creation are represented by the temple furnishings as follows:
Day 1 - The Holy of Holies
Day 2 - The Veil
Day 3 - The Table of Showbread
Day 4 - The Menorah
Day 5 - The Altar
Day 6 - The High Priest

You'll notice that in the video the list is not exactly the same as the list given by Margaret Barker so they used different sources but the point is that the temple represented the vision of Moses which he had of the creation. The creation is also a central theme of modern LDS temples which is a testament to their ancient origin.

Mormonism and the Temple Conference

The videos from the "Mormonism and the Temple" Conference held at Utah State are now online. Posted below is the video of the opening remarks from Margaret Barker and Laurence Hemming. I was very impressed with Laurence Hemming's remarks and I highly recommend watching them. They start at about 12:45.