Posts Tagged ‘Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’


Church Finance – Part IV

When I concluded part III of the Church Finance series I fully believed that it was complete.  Well, not complete, but finished as far as I was concerned.  I had dug up as much information, and tried to tie as many loose ends together as I thought I could.  And, frankly, I wasn’t even interested in looking into too many details of the seedy side of church finance.  I was semi-determined to move on to other topics, if not take a break for awhile.  As Justin mentioned in his comment in Part III, this isn’t uplifting material and certainly weighs on the mind, mine included.  It’s rarely pretty digging up some of this information, even though it may be “out and about” and readily findable.  I concur.  And, yet I thought I had moved on from it.

In fact, I had even toyed with closing this thing altogether, not because of what I was writing on, or its effects on me, but because I thought my time was finished in the “blog” world.  In beginning this blog I mentioned how I had set out to do a “one year” commitment, though far from set on that 365-day timetable.  I’m not a full-time blogger by any stretch.  I’m even embarrassed to mention that I have a “blog.”  (Pride issue, methinks.)  And yet, in pondering these topics and what I wanted to do with my time prior to some of the coming changes we’re about to see, I thought it might be best to shut up shop, leave it “live” so anyone/everyone could read, continue to comment and hopefully find something worthwhile in their personal searching.  In fact, just this morning I started writing the “conclusion.”  Some people can carry on for years writing these things and on their blogs, maintaining a “following” and keeping their blogs alive.  I’m not one of those people.  I don’t particularly have an interest in continuing something like this for years on end, though I do maintain it as a way to fulfill my feelings prior to the clock rolling over into 2010.

And yet, as I started writing the “conclusion” I stopped, if only because I didn’t want to do it the way I was doing it.  Then, today, I decided to sit down and listen to an interview and see if my earlier impressions on something I discussed in Part III of the Church Finance series were right or wrong, or perhaps inadequate.  And, based on what I listened to, I’d have to give a hearty assessment of it being entirely inadequate.

I found the mp3 interview thanks to a search term someone had used to find my blog.  In the backroom of the site, I can see what people enter in some search engine in order to find my site.  Occasionally I’ll replicate those terms to see if I can find something interesting to read.  This particular day, two people entered the following search term:  “Paul Drockton Monson Oct 2010.”  Performing that search in a site – like Google – produces a result (the top result) that takes you to the Morningliberty.com website and a link therein to an interview with the very Paul Drockton[1] I sarcastically thanked in my last article, thanked for utterly blowing me off.  In fact, I found his website to not only be entirely too noisy (ads, bold font and crazy color schemes that just look like they were thrown up by a high schooler with no internet experience whatsoever.  I find it difficult to meander such sites as they’re so clogged with information that has nothing to do with the site, or are too overcrowded to make even the simplest searches annoying.  But, I digress.).  As such, I didn’t really give too much thought to his site, or his information (though the latter was largely due to information that couldn’t be verified anywhere else).

And yet, it turns out that his blowing me off (and his insanely annoying website) may have been the best thing for me as it provided me with an opportunity to find an interesting connection that I may have otherwise overlooked.  Prior to getting to that connection, I’d encourage everyone to at least listen to Drockton’s interview.  It’s 2 hours in length, but I feel it’s a good way to get to know someone and see/hear for yourself what they’re saying and whether they are someone worth listening to.  Part 2 is likely more useful, though you will miss out on some of the background behind how Drockton came to this stage of life.  If I may assert, I find it’s much easier to dismiss someone (like me) who only writes something, somewhere on some topic.  Getting to listen to some interview with that same person, though, gives everyone a chance to listen to a voice, a frequency and see if your impressions of digital ink match up with the actual voice.  And, I must say, listening to Drockton was well worth the 2 hours.  He came off a likeable, normal person who’s been through some small measure of hell for what he felt like he should expose.

Now, that being said, I found a couple of interesting comparisons on Drockton’s website that I thought I’d peruse here, if only for a couple of paragraphs.[2] I took a total of 6 buildings or developments to compare to the City Creek project that is currently being developed by the LDS church in downtown Salt Lake City.  The following represents those comparisons:

Building 1:  Taipai 101, Taipai, Taiwan[3]


· Built in 2004

· 101 floors tall (1,667 feet)

· Total Cost:  $1.8 billion, or $405/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  4,440,100

· Interesting tidbit:  The tower’s design specifications are based on the number ‘8’, a lucky number in traditional Chinese culture. The design and planning of the tower was carried out by a Feng Shui master. The elevators in the building are the fastest in the world, rising at 1008 metres per minute (60.48 km/hour) and descending at 610 m/min (36.6 km/hour).  The Taiwan Stock exchange is housed in this building

Building 2: Petronas Twin Towers – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia[4]


· Built in 1998

· 88 floors tall (1,483 feet)

· Total square feet:  4,252,000

· Total Cost:  $1.6 billion, or $376/square foot

· Interesting tidbit: The towers are the world’s tallest twin buildings. Completed in 1998, they are connected on the 41st and 42nd floors by a sky bridge, which was designed as a safety corridor. The skybridge constructed by Kukdong Engineering & Construction between the two towers is the highest 2-story bridge in the world. Petronas Towers, designed by Argentine architect Cesar Pelli, has a beautiful blend of Islamic art, design and architecture.

Building 3:  Sears Tower (now known as the Willis Tower) – Chicago, Illinois[5]


· Built in 1974

· 1,451 feet tall

· Total Cost:  $150 million ($645.3 million in 2009 dollars, or $142/square foot)

· Total Square Feet:  4,560,000

Building 4:  Burj Khalifa – Dubai, United Arab Emirates[6]


· Built in 2009.  Officially opened on 4 January 2010.

· 2,717 feet tall (tallest manmade building ever built)

· Total Cost:  $1.5 billion, or $450/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  3,331,100

· Interesting tidbits:  holds the current world records for (a) tallest skyscraper, (b) tallest structure ever built, (c) building with the most floors, (d) world’s fastest elevator, (e) highest outdoor observation deck – 124th floor, (f) world’s highest mosque – 158th floor, and (g) world’s highest swimming pool – 76th floor.  The Burj Khalifa is also home to a $217 million fountain that is illuminated by some 6,600 lights and 50 colored projectors.

Building (Development, really) 5:  Mohammed Bin Zayed City Development – Dubai, United Arab Emirates [7]


· Built in 2012 (estimated).  Construction started in 2009.

· Project will consist of 349 residential towers, all between 12 and 22 stories tall.[8]

· Project will included public, commercial, retail and recreational facilities

· Total Residential Units:  50,000 (to house approximately 85,000 people.)

· Project will include infrastructure, landscaping and community amenities

· Project will cover approximately 5,000,000 square meters (53.8 million square feet).

· Total Cost:  $7.1 billion, or $132/square foot

Building (Development, really) 6:  City Center – Las Vegas, Nevada[9]


· Opened in 2009.

· Total size:  76 acres (1,560,500 square meters, or 16,797,000 square feet)

· Total cost:  $11 billion, or $655 per square foot.

· Features a Tram with a 2,100 foot elevated track which can handle 3,266 passengers per hour in each direction, a 6,900 car parking garage, approximately 5,000 hotel rooms and 2,400 condominium units.  All of the buildings are LEED certified “Gold.”

Building 7:  Atlantis – Dubai, United Arab Emirates

  • Opened in 2008
  • Total cost: $1.5 billion ($750k per hotel room)
  • Total size: 2,000 hotel rooms + 20,000 sq. ft. of retail space.  Approx. 114 acres in size.
  • Two towers:  one 18 story tower and one 28 story tower

Building (Development, really) 8:  City Creek Center – Salt Lake City, Utah[10]

· Total size:  20 acres – 2.5 city blocks (81,000 square meters) .

· Total residential units:  700 (to house approximately 1,200 people, or 1.4% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project).

· Total retail space:  2,274,000 square feet

· Total (estimated) cost:  $6.0 billion (or 84.5% of the total cost of the Bin Zayed project).  ~$,3000 per square foot (it’s rather hard to pin this number down, it seems.  Taubman lists the overall office space at 1.4 million square feet, while the Church lists it at 1.6 million square feet.  On top of that the total residential square feet has been virtually impossible to locate.  So, let’s assume it’s around $3,000/ft.  Even if we’re overly conservative this figure would be well north of $2,000/ft…figures that are hard to find anywhere).

As the comparison shows – at least to my mind – is that City Creek Center (in Salt Lake) isn’t quite up to snuff with the other developments.  I understand that certain economies of scale come into play in developing real estate (perhaps better known as the “works of men”), but even so, would you rather have the Burj Khalifa sitting in downtown Salt Lake City, or perhaps City Center (Las Vegas’ – by comparison – huge development), or perhaps the Petronas’ Twin Towers?  Sure, they’d be out of place for the most part, but by seer architectural standards, you sure do get a lot more bang for your buck.  The most expensive of the comparison properties was built at $655 per square foot, whereas the “towers” were all built at $450 per square foot or less.  City Creek Center, by contrast, was/is being built at ~$3,000 per square foot, or nearly 5x more expensive than the next nearest comparable property, and that’s assuming that the City Creek Center utilizes every square foot of the approximately 20-acre development site.

If you compare it with the Mohammed Bin Zayed project, they are getting nearly 350 towers, all between 12 and 22 stories tall.  Think about that for a minute.  An entire city for nearly the same price that Salt Lake City is getting City Creek Center.  As far as “bang for the buck,” it’s hard to ignore building an entire city versus a two and a half city blocks. The City Creek Center is only 1.6% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project and offers only 1.4% of the total housing units, and yet costs nearly 84.5% as much as the Bin Zayed project.  Perhaps that should be highlighted:  City Creek Center is producing nearly 49,000 fewer housing units and yet has the price tag that’s nearly as much as the Bin Zayed project.  The Burj Khalifa will offer some 3,000,000 square feet of interior space, while City Center will merely offer 674,000 square feet.

For the price, assuming a final price tag of $6 billion for the City Creek Center, Salt Lake could be home to no fewer than four Burj Khalifa’s, or four Petronas’ Twin Towers, or four Atlantis the Palm hotels cordoning off downtown, or … .  Imagine four of those structures gracing the Salt Lake City skyline, as opposed to the rather pedestrian development it now seems to be.

Yes, we’re talking about billions of dollars, but there is simply no comparison.  The Church is either getting bilked out of its “sacred” tithing “investment funds,” or the publicized scope of work is far greater than is being published, or some serious funds are changing hands under the table.  This is the idea that Drockton’s work clued me in on.  Some are even alleging that the Church is either facilitating a money laundering scheme, someone(s) are getting some serious kickbacks or lining of their pockets, or perhaps worse[11].  Or, perhaps there’s some huge underground structure being built “hidden in plain sight.”  Whatever it may be, what’s plain to see is that the numbers and the currently published (and available) information simply don’t match up.

In one of the first (if not the first) news conferences where H. David Burton announced the City Creek Center he stated that the church had “sought advice from some of the best minds in the country” as a way to create the best development they could.  Either those minds weren’t very good (i.e., is this the best our minds can produce), or those minds were merely inflating the cost of the budget through some exorbitant fees, or those minds were the ones crafting the financing of the project and had ulterior motives.

What’s worse – the incredible lack of creativity and ingenuity when given a $6 billion budget, or the money laundering that has to underpin a project of this size when the sources and uses simply don’t match up?

I declare a draw.

What say you?[12]


[1]Mormons – Freemasonry Illuminati Taking Over.”  28 September 2010.  Retrieved 10/22/2010.

[2] See, “World’s Tallest Buildings.”  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[3] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taipei_101 for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[4] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petronas_Towers for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[5] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willis_Tower for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[6] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Khalifa for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[7] See:  http://www.keoic.com/projects/master/zayed/pdf/RFS-9275-SPU.pdf for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[8] See:  http://www.estatesdubai.com/2009/04/mohammed-bin-zayed-city-residential.html for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[9] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CityCenter for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[10] See:  http://www.downtownrising.com/index.php/city-creek-introduction for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[12] P.S.  My apologies to Drockton for my rather terse comments in the previous post.  I have not yet reached out to him again, but have found some measure of satisfaction listening to his Morning Liberty interview, as well as a few other articles on his **still** overly crowded website.

 

Church Finance – Part IV

When I concluded part III of the Church Finance series I fully believed that it was complete.  Well, not complete, but finished as far as I was concerned.  I had dug up as much information, and tried to tie as many loose ends together as I thought I could.  And, frankly, I wasn’t even interested in looking into too many details of the seedy side of church finance.  I was semi-determined to move on to other topics, if not take a break for awhile.  As Justin mentioned in his comment in Part III, this isn’t uplifting material and certainly weighs on the mind, mine included.  It’s rarely pretty digging up some of this information, even though it may be “out and about” and readily findable.  I concur.  And, yet I thought I had moved on from it.

In fact, I had even toyed with closing this thing altogether, not because of what I was writing on, or its effects on me, but because I thought my time was finished in the “blog” world.  In beginning this blog I mentioned how I had set out to do a “one year” commitment, though far from set on that 365-day timetable.  I’m not a full-time blogger by any stretch.  I’m even embarrassed to mention that I have a “blog.”  (Pride issue, methinks.)  And yet, in pondering these topics and what I wanted to do with my time prior to some of the coming changes we’re about to see, I thought it might be best to shut up shop, leave it “live” so anyone/everyone could read, continue to comment and hopefully find something worthwhile in their personal searching.  In fact, just this morning I started writing the “conclusion.”  Some people can carry on for years writing these things and on their blogs, maintaining a “following” and keeping their blogs alive.  I’m not one of those people.  I don’t particularly have an interest in continuing something like this, though I do maintain it as a way to fulfill my feelings prior to the clock rolling over into 2010.

And yet, as I started writing the “conclusion” I stopped, if only because I didn’t want to do it the way I was doing it.  Then, today, I decided to sit down and listen to an interview and see if my earlier impressions on something I discussed in Part III of the Church Finance series were right or wrong, or perhaps inadequate.  And, based on what I listened to, I’d have to give a hearty assessment of it being entirely inadequate.

I found the mp3 interview thanks to a search term someone had used to find my blog.  In the backroom of the site, I can see what people enter in some search engine in order to find my site.  Occasionally I’ll replicate those terms to see if I can find something interesting to read.  This particular day, two people entered the following search term:  “Paul Drockton Monson Oct 2010.”  Performing that search in a site – like Google – produces a result (the top result) that takes you to the Morningliberty.com website and a link therein to an interview with the very Paul Drockton[1] I sarcastically thanked in my last article, thanked for utterly blowing me off.  In fact, I found his website to not only be entirely too noisy (ads, bold font and crazy color schemes that just look like they were thrown up by a high schooler with no internet experience whatsoever.  I find it difficult to meander such sites as they’re so clogged with information that has nothing to do with the site, or are too overcrowded to make even the simplest searches annoying.  But, I digress.).  As such, I didn’t really give too much thought to his site, or his information (though the latter was largely due to information that couldn’t be verified anywhere else).

And yet, it turns out that his blowing me off (and his insanely annoying website) may have been the best thing for me as it provided me with an opportunity to find an interesting connection that I may have otherwise overlooked.  Prior to getting to that connection, I’d encourage everyone to at least listen to Drockton’s interview.  It’s 2 hours in length, but I feel it’s a good way to get to know someone and see/hear for yourself what they’re saying and whether they are someone worth listening to.  Part 2 is likely more useful, though you will miss out on some of the background behind how Drockton came to this stage of life.  If I may assert, I find it’s much easier to dismiss someone (like me) who only writes something, somewhere on some topic.  Getting to listen to some interview with that same person, though, gives everyone a chance to listen to a voice, a frequency and see if your impressions of digital ink match up with the actual voice.  And, I must say, listening to Drockton was well worth the 2 hours.  He came off a likeable, normal person who’s been through some small measure of hell for what he felt like he should expose.

Now, that being said, I found a couple of interesting comparisons on Drockton’s website that I thought I’d peruse here, if only for a couple of paragraphs.[2] I took a total of 6 buildings or developments to compare to the City Creek project that is currently being developed by the LDS church in downtown Salt Lake City.  The following represents those comparisons:

Building 1:  Taipai 101, Taipai, Taiwan

· Built in 2004

· 101 floors tall (1,667 feet)

· Total Cost:  $1.8 billion, or $405/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  4,440,100

· Interesting tidbit:  The tower’s design specifications are based on the number ‘8’, a lucky number in traditional Chinese culture. The design and planning of the tower was carried out by a Feng Shui master. The elevators in the building are the fastest in the world, rising at 1008 metres per minute (60.48 km/hour) and descending at 610 m/min (36.6 km/hour).  The Taiwan Stock exchange is housed in this building

Building 2:  Petronas Twin Towers – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

· Built in 1998

· 88 floors tall (1,483 feet)

· Total square feet:  4,252,000

· Total Cost:  $1.6 billion, or $376/square foot

· Interesting tidbit: The towers are the world’s tallest twin buildings. Completed in 1998, they are connected on the 41st and 42nd floors by a sky bridge, which was designed as a safety corridor. The skybridge constructed by Kukdong Engineering & Construction between the two towers is the highest 2-story bridge in the world. Petronas Towers, designed by Argentine architect Cesar Pelli, has a beautiful blend of Islamic art, design and architecture.

Building 3:  Sears Tower (now known as the Willis Tower) – Chicago, Illinois

· Built in 1974

· 1,451 feet tall

· Total Cost:  $150 million ($645.3 million in 2009 dollars, or $142/square foot)

· Total Square Feet:  4,560,000

Building 4:  Burj Khalifa – Dubai, United Arab Emirates[3]

· Built in 2009.  Officially opened on 4 January 2010.

· 2,717 feet tall (tallest manmade building ever built)

· Total Cost:  $1.5 billion, or $450/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  3,331,100

· Interesting tidbits:  holds the current world records for (a) tallest skyscraper, (b) tallest structure ever built, (c) building with the most floors, (d) world’s fastest elevator, (e) highest outdoor observation deck – 124th floor, (f) world’s highest mosque – 158th floor, and (g) world’s highest swimming pool – 76th floor.  The Burj Khalifa is also home to a $217 million fountain that is illuminated by some 6,600 lights and 50 colored projectors.

Building (Development, really) 5:  Mohammed Bin Zayed City Development[4]

· Built in 2012 (estimated).  Construction started in 2009.

· Project will consist of 349 residential towers, all between 12 and 22 stories tall.[5]

· Project will included public, commercial, retail and recreational facilities

· Total Residential Units:  50,000 (to house approximately 85,000 people.)

· Project will include infrastructure, landscaping and community amenities

· Project will cover approximately 5,000,000 square meters (53.8 million square feet).

· Total Cost:  $7.1 billion, or $132/square foot

Building (Development, really) 6:  City Center – Las Vegas, Nevada[6]

· Opened in 2009.

· Total size:  76 acres (1,560,500 square meters, or 16,797,000 square feet)

· Total cost:  $11 billion, or $655 per square foot.

· Features a Tram with a 2,100 foot elevated track which can handle 3,266 passengers per hour in each direction, a 6,900 car parking garage, approximately 5,000 hotel rooms and 2,400 condominium units.  All of the buildings are LEED certified “Gold.”

Building (Development, really) 7:  City Creek Center – Salt Lake City, Utah[7]

· Total size:  20 acres – 2.5 city blocks (81,000 square meters, or 871,876 square feet in total, or 1.6% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project).

· Total residential units:  700 (to house approximately 1,200 people, or 1.4% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project).

· Total retail space:  674,000 square feet

· Total (estimated) cost:  $6.0 billion (or 84.5% of the total cost of the Bin Zayed project).  $6,881 per square foot.

As the comparison shows – at least to my mind – is that City Creek Center (in Salt Lake) isn’t quite up to snuff with the other developments.  I understand that certain economies of scale come into play in developing real estate (perhaps better known as the “works of men”), but even so, would you rather have the Burj Khalifa sitting in downtown Salt Lake City, or perhaps City Center (Las Vegas’ – by comparison – huge development), or perhaps the Petronas’ Twin Towers?  Sure, they’d be out of place for the most part, but by seer architectural standards, you sure do get a lot more bang for your buck.  The most expensive of the comparison properties was built at $655 per square foot, whereas the “towers” were all built at $450 per square foot or less.  City Creek Center, by contrast, was/is being built at $6,881 per square foot, or nearly 10.5x more expensive than the next nearest comparable property, and that’s assuming that the City Creek Center utilizes every square foot of the approximately 20-acre development site.

If you compare it with the Mohammed Bin Zayed project, they are getting nearly 350 towers.  Think about that for a minute.  An entire city for nearly the same price that Salt Lake City is getting City Creek Center.  As far as “bang for the buck,” it’s hard to ignore building an entire city versus a two and a half city blocks. The City Creek Center is only 1.6% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project and offers only 1.4% of the total housing units, and yet costs nearly 84.5% as much as the Bin Zayed project.  Perhaps that should be highlighted:  City Creek Center is producing nearly 49,000 fewer housing units and yet has the price tag that’s nearly as much as the Bin Zayed project.  The Burj Khalifa will offer some 3,000,000 square feet of interior space, while City Center will merely offer 674,000 square feet.

For the price, assuming a final price tag of $6 billion for the City Creek Center, Salt Lake could be home to no fewer than four Burj Khalifa’s.  Imagine four of those structures gracing the Salt Lake City skyline, as opposed to the rather pedestrian development it seems to be.


/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

Church Finance – Part IV

When I concluded part III of the Church Finance series I fully believed that it was complete.  Well, not complete, but finished as far as I was concerned.  I had dug up as much information, and tried to tie as many loose ends together as I thought I could.  And, frankly, I wasn’t even interested in looking into too many details of the seedy side of church finance.  I was semi-determined to move on to other topics, if not take a break for awhile.  As Justin mentioned in his comment in Part III, this isn’t uplifting material and certainly weighs on the mind, mine included.  It’s rarely pretty digging up some of this information, even though it may be “out and about” and readily findable.  I concur.  And, yet I thought I had moved on from it.

In fact, I had even toyed with closing this thing altogether, not because of what I was writing on, or its effects on me, but because I thought my time was finished in the “blog” world.  In beginning this blog I mentioned how I had set out to do a “one year” commitment, though far from set on that 365-day timetable.  I’m not a full-time blogger by any stretch.  I’m even embarrassed to mention that I have a “blog.”  (Pride issue, methinks.)  And yet, in pondering these topics and what I wanted to do with my time prior to some of the coming changes we’re about to see, I thought it might be best to shut up shop, leave it “live” so anyone/everyone could read, continue to comment and hopefully find something worthwhile in their personal searching.  In fact, just this morning I started writing the “conclusion.”  Some people can carry on for years writing these things and on their blogs, maintaining a “following” and keeping their blogs alive.  I’m not one of those people.  I don’t particularly have an interest in continuing something like this, though I do maintain it as a way to fulfill my feelings prior to the clock rolling over into 2010.

And yet, as I started writing the “conclusion” I stopped, if only because I didn’t want to do it the way I was doing it.  Then, today, I decided to sit down and listen to an interview and see if my earlier impressions on something I discussed in Part III of the Church Finance series were right or wrong, or perhaps inadequate.  And, based on what I listened to, I’d have to give a hearty assessment of it being entirely inadequate.

I found the mp3 interview thanks to a search term someone had used to find my blog.  In the backroom of the site, I can see what people enter in some search engine in order to find my site.  Occasionally I’ll replicate those terms to see if I can find something interesting to read.  This particular day, two people entered the following search term:  “Paul Drockton Monson Oct 2010.”  Performing that search in a site – like Google – produces a result (the top result) that takes you to the Morningliberty.com website and a link therein to an interview with the very Paul Drockton[1] I sarcastically thanked in my last article, thanked for utterly blowing me off.  In fact, I found his website to not only be entirely too noisy (ads, bold font and crazy color schemes that just look like they were thrown up by a high schooler with no internet experience whatsoever.  I find it difficult to meander such sites as they’re so clogged with information that has nothing to do with the site, or are too overcrowded to make even the simplest searches annoying.  But, I digress.).  As such, I didn’t really give too much thought to his site, or his information (though the latter was largely due to information that couldn’t be verified anywhere else).

And yet, it turns out that his blowing me off (and his insanely annoying website) may have been the best thing for me as it provided me with an opportunity to find an interesting connection that I may have otherwise overlooked.  Prior to getting to that connection, I’d encourage everyone to at least listen to Drockton’s interview.  It’s 2 hours in length, but I feel it’s a good way to get to know someone and see/hear for yourself what they’re saying and whether they are someone worth listening to.  Part 2 is likely more useful, though you will miss out on some of the background behind how Drockton came to this stage of life.  If I may assert, I find it’s much easier to dismiss someone (like me) who only writes something, somewhere on some topic.  Getting to listen to some interview with that same person, though, gives everyone a chance to listen to a voice, a frequency and see if your impressions of digital ink match up with the actual voice.  And, I must say, listening to Drockton was well worth the 2 hours.  He came off a likeable, normal person who’s been through some small measure of hell for what he felt like he should expose.

Now, that being said, I found a couple of interesting comparisons on Drockton’s website that I thought I’d peruse here, if only for a couple of paragraphs.[2] I took a total of 6 buildings or developments to compare to the City Creek project that is currently being developed by the LDS church in downtown Salt Lake City.  The following represents those comparisons:

Building 1:  Taipai 101, Taipai, Taiwan[3]

· Built in 2004

· 101 floors tall (1,667 feet)

· Total Cost:  $1.8 billion, or $405/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  4,440,100

· Interesting tidbit:  The tower’s design specifications are based on the number ‘8’, a lucky number in traditional Chinese culture. The design and planning of the tower was carried out by a Feng Shui master. The elevators in the building are the fastest in the world, rising at 1008 metres per minute (60.48 km/hour) and descending at 610 m/min (36.6 km/hour).  The Taiwan Stock exchange is housed in this building

Building 2:  Petronas Twin Towers – Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia[4]

· Built in 1998

· 88 floors tall (1,483 feet)

· Total square feet:  4,252,000

· Total Cost:  $1.6 billion, or $376/square foot

· Interesting tidbit: The towers are the world’s tallest twin buildings. Completed in 1998, they are connected on the 41st and 42nd floors by a sky bridge, which was designed as a safety corridor. The skybridge constructed by Kukdong Engineering & Construction between the two towers is the highest 2-story bridge in the world. Petronas Towers, designed by Argentine architect Cesar Pelli, has a beautiful blend of Islamic art, design and architecture.

Building 3:  Sears Tower (now known as the Willis Tower) – Chicago, Illinois[5]

· Built in 1974

· 1,451 feet tall

· Total Cost:  $150 million ($645.3 million in 2009 dollars, or $142/square foot)

· Total Square Feet:  4,560,000

Building 4:  Burj Khalifa – Dubai, United Arab Emirates[6]

· Built in 2009.  Officially opened on 4 January 2010.

· 2,717 feet tall (tallest manmade building ever built)

· Total Cost:  $1.5 billion, or $450/square foot

· Total Square Feet:  3,331,100

· Interesting tidbits:  holds the current world records for (a) tallest skyscraper, (b) tallest structure ever built, (c) building with the most floors, (d) world’s fastest elevator, (e) highest outdoor observation deck – 124th floor, (f) world’s highest mosque – 158th floor, and (g) world’s highest swimming pool – 76th floor.  The Burj Khalifa is also home to a $217 million fountain that is illuminated by some 6,600 lights and 50 colored projectors.

Building (Development, really) 5:  Mohammed Bin Zayed City Development[7]

· Built in 2012 (estimated).  Construction started in 2009.

· Project will consist of 349 residential towers, all between 12 and 22 stories tall.[8]

· Project will included public, commercial, retail and recreational facilities

· Total Residential Units:  50,000 (to house approximately 85,000 people.)

· Project will include infrastructure, landscaping and community amenities

· Project will cover approximately 5,000,000 square meters (53.8 million square feet).

· Total Cost:  $7.1 billion, or $132/square foot

Building (Development, really) 6:  City Center – Las Vegas, Nevada[9]

· Opened in 2009.

· Total size:  76 acres (1,560,500 square meters, or 16,797,000 square feet)

· Total cost:  $11 billion, or $655 per square foot.

· Features a Tram with a 2,100 foot elevated track which can handle 3,266 passengers per hour in each direction, a 6,900 car parking garage, approximately 5,000 hotel rooms and 2,400 condominium units.  All of the buildings are LEED certified “Gold.”

Building (Development, really) 7:  City Creek Center – Salt Lake City, Utah[10]

· Total size:  20 acres – 2.5 city blocks (81,000 square meters, or 871,876 square feet in total, or 1.6% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project).

· Total residential units:  700 (to house approximately 1,200 people, or 1.4% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project).

· Total retail space:  674,000 square feet

· Total (estimated) cost:  $6.0 billion (or 84.5% of the total cost of the Bin Zayed project).  $6,881 per square foot.

As the comparison shows – at least to my mind – is that City Creek Center (in Salt Lake) isn’t quite up to snuff with the other developments.  I understand that certain economies of scale come into play in developing real estate (perhaps better known as the “works of men”), but even so, would you rather have the Burj Khalifa sitting in downtown Salt Lake City, or perhaps City Center (Las Vegas’ – by comparison – huge development), or perhaps the Petronas’ Twin Towers?  Sure, they’d be out of place for the most part, but by seer architectural standards, you sure do get a lot more bang for your buck.  The most expensive of the comparison properties was built at $655 per square foot, whereas the “towers” were all built at $450 per square foot or less.  City Creek Center, by contrast, was/is being built at $6,881 per square foot, or nearly 10.5x more expensive than the next nearest comparable property, and that’s assuming that the City Creek Center utilizes every square foot of the approximately 20-acre development site.

If you compare it with the Mohammed Bin Zayed project, they are getting nearly 350 towers.  Think about that for a minute.  An entire city for nearly the same price that Salt Lake City is getting City Creek Center.  As far as “bang for the buck,” it’s hard to ignore building an entire city versus a two and a half city blocks. The City Creek Center is only 1.6% of the total size of the Bin Zayed project and offers only 1.4% of the total housing units, and yet costs nearly 84.5% as much as the Bin Zayed project.  Perhaps that should be highlighted:  City Creek Center is producing nearly 49,000 fewer housing units and yet has the price tag that’s nearly as much as the Bin Zayed project.  The Burj Khalifa will offer some 3,000,000 square feet of interior space, while City Center will merely offer 674,000 square feet.

For the price, assuming a final price tag of $6 billion for the City Creek Center, Salt Lake could be home to no fewer than four Burj Khalifa’s.  Imagine four of those structures gracing the Salt Lake City skyline, as opposed to the rather pedestrian development it seems to be.

Yes, we’re talking about billions of dollars, but there is simply no comparison.  The Church is either getting bilked out of its “sacred” tithing “investment funds,” or the publicized scope of work is far greater than is being published, or some serious funds are changing hands under the table.  This is the idea that Drockton’s work clued me in on.  Some are even alleging that the Church is either facilitating a money laundering scheme, someone(s) are getting some serious kickbacks or lining of their pockets, or perhaps worse[11].  Or, perhaps there’s some huge underground structure being built “hidden in plain sight.”  Whatever it may be, what’s plain to see is that the numbers and currently published information simply don’t match up.

What say you?[12]


[1]Mormons – Freemasonry Illuminati Taking Over.”  28 September 2010.  Retrieved 10/22/2010.

[2] See, “World’s Tallest Buildings.”  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[3] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taipei_101 for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[4] See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petronas_Towers for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[5] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willis_Tower for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[6] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Khalifa for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[7] See:  http://www.keoic.com/projects/master/zayed/pdf/RFS-9275-SPU.pdf for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[8] See:  http://www.estatesdubai.com/2009/04/mohammed-bin-zayed-city-residential.html for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[9] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CityCenter for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[10] See:  http://www.downtownrising.com/index.php/city-creek-introduction for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[12] P.S.  My apologies to Drockton for my rather terse comments in the previous post.  I have not yet reached out to him again, but have found some measure of satisfaction listening to his Morning Liberty interview, as well as a few other articles on his **still** overly crowded website.

Yes, we’re talking about billions of dollars, but there is simply no comparison.  The Church is either getting bilked out of its “sacred” tithing “investment funds,” or the publicized scope of work is far greater than is being published, or some serious funds are changing hands under the table.  This is the idea that Drockton’s work clued me in on.  Some are even alleging that the Church is either facilitating a money laundering scheme, someone(s) are getting some serious kickbacks or lining of their pockets, or perhaps worse[8].  Or, perhaps there’s some huge underground structure being built “hidden in plain sight.”  Whatever it may be, what’s plain to see is that the numbers and currently published information simply don’t match up.

What say you?[9]


[1]Mormons – Freemasonry Illuminati Taking Over.”  28 September 2010.  Retrieved 10/22/2010.

[2] See, “World’s Tallest Buildings.”  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[3] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burj_Khalifa for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[4] See:  http://www.keoic.com/projects/master/zayed/pdf/RFS-9275-SPU.pdf for more details.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[5] See:  http://www.estatesdubai.com/2009/04/mohammed-bin-zayed-city-residential.html for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[6] See:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CityCenter for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[7] See:  http://www.downtownrising.com/index.php/city-creek-introduction for more information.  Retrieved 10/25/2010.

[9] P.S.  My apologies to Drockton for my rather terse comments in the previous post.  I have not yet reached out to him again, but have found some measure of satisfaction listening to his Morning Liberty interview, as well as a few other articles on his **still** overly crowded website.


When you see this man, think of Packer (or any other member of the First Presidency or Qof12).

2-Bit Prophets

I’m working on a different research project that I’ll hopefully upload here soon, but thought this might be worth adding.  As many of you probably know, Boyd Packer spoke to a “multi-stake” conference in Utah and the regions thereabout back on September 12th.  A few of the sites I meander to on occasion had devoted large threads to discussing what he did, or did not, say.  What these sites shared, and those posting stated, were the inspiration for this.

In an email correspondence with a couple of my friends, one of them received an email from another friend which discussed this same conference and what Packer had said.

What’s amusing is that this isn’t the first time this sort of thing has surrounded Packer.  In 2001, Packer rather infamously stated (or did he?) this statement that has been denied by all parties involved:

“The youth of the Church today were generals in the war in heaven.”

This rumor was so widespread that the LDS church had to issue a formal denial through the LDS Church News on April 28, 2001, which read:

“[Boyd Packer] did not make that statement.  I do not believe that statement.  … None of the Brethren made that statement.”

In 2008, at a rather infamous talk given to the Forest Bend Ward, Packer was alleged to have said some fairly dire things about the then current economic climate.  In one such email that made the rounds among the LDS community, one sister noted:

“I can’t even begin to describe what an amazing and wonderful meeting it was today. The Spirit was so strong and the counsel so heartfelt and direct:  a personal message for us, each of us, delivered by an Apostle of the Lord, from the Lord.  A message to counsel, inspire, and strengthen us in troubled and worry-filled times.  And yet so uplifting!  Reminding us of the great promises the Lord has made to us.  It was a sacred experience and I am so grateful I was there and that I’m able to share some part of it with you.[1]

This “inspiring” talk was, once again, denied to have happened by all the pertinent parties and merely a result of our internet culture.  The “Church Public Affairs” office stated that although Packer did speak a that ward (the Forest Bend Ward), there was no official transcript of the talk.  As such, the one making the rounds in emails must have been written after the meeting and therefore “not be considered authoritative.”[2]

That talk, it seems, stated that:

“We live in troubled times.  There is a great financial crisis and we’ve seen something that hasn’t happened in the last 60 years:  the world’s financial markets are collapsing … I pronounce upon you an Apostolic blessing. Comfort our children. Little children can be afraid of things we might not think of. Comfort them and strengthen our families. Turn off the television and focus on family. Pay your tithing. The promise is there – pay your tithing and you’ll be watched over. You’ll be alright. None of us is exempt from trials. If hard times come upon you and your income dwindles, remember that tithing is equitable for everyone: 10%. If you have nothing, then it’s 10% of practically nothing. Pay your tithing, do what you’re supposed to do. You’ll be comforted.  Sure, trials will come. Because of them, faith will increase. Happiness will increase. Security will increase.”

Whether or not true, in spite of the doctrinal inconsistencies mentioned therein, it’s alleged to not have happened.  In response to such matters, the Church reported, back in May 2004, that:

“From time to time statements are circulated among members which are inaccurately attributed to the leaders of the Church. Many such statements distort current Church teachings and are often based on rumors and innuendos. They are never transmitted officially, but by word of mouth, e-mail, or other informal means.

We encourage members of the Church to never teach or pass on such statements without verifying that they are from approved Church sources, such as official statements, communications, and publications. Any notes made when General Authorities, Area Authority Seventies, or other general Church officers speak at regional and stake conferences or other meetings should not be distributed without the consent of the speaker. Personal notes are for individual use only. [emphasis added by FAIR]

True spiritual growth is based on studying the scriptures, the teachings of the Brethren, and Church publications.”

Though you won’t find that letter on the LDS Church News site which acts as a repository for First Presidency Letters[3], it’s nevertheless assumed to be true.

Then again, this past week another one of these “events” is reported to have happened.  This time Packer is alleged to have said,

“I’ve thought a lot about this conference and all of you and brother Holland and the others have talked about the pioneer days. THEY HAD THE EASY PART. From now on it’s going to be different and it’s going to be rougher. When you think of the Hole in the Rock or Rocky Ridge or any of the other places where the pioneers served, in many ways their part was easier than our part is going to be.  … The easy times are in the past. The Rocky Ridge and the other pioneer challenges like the Hole in The Rock were the easy times. Now we have the difficult times. But we’re not being left without strength and power. The priesthood is with us and the gospel is with us as we live our lives as best we can. We have a father that will guide us and he will correct us, sometimes painfully, but he’ll correct us.”[4] (emphasis was in the original emailed sent to me.  I assume it’s not original to the actual talk).

LDS bloggers have gleefully responded:

“All of the messages were very strong and very clear. Despite all that was said I feel that those who have heeded the voice of the prophets and have done all that they could to prepare will not have reason to fear.  The messages were a strong confirmation for me of the timeline that we are on. … Big big changes coming in the next 6 months to a year. General Conference will be amazing I have no doubt.”

And:

“Just heard from a friend that attended and gave very much the same report as the others who have posted. I’m glad I got another 120 lbs of flour in sealed containers last week. Time to visit the cannery again this week for more milk.”

And:

“I really appreciate all of your posts. It sounds like it was an amazing conference. I hope some of you took notes and can share further with us. It certainly does seem that now is the time to get with the program and to do whatever we need to as soon as we’re able.”

And:

“Like others here, I was impressed that Pres. Packer was giving us a warning. He actually mentioned the fact that the pioneers had it easy three different times. I won’t give the exact quote (I wrote it down) but in essence he said The pioneers had the easy part. Things will be different for us in the future. It was similar to the warning he gave a year ago in April’s priesthood session where he said We move from a generation of ease and entertainment to a generation of hard work and responsibility. We do not know how long that will last. Some here have suggested that his talk was typical stake conference fodder, but I couldn’t disagree more. It was a warning loud and clear for those with ears to hear.”

And:

“Great day in the morning! [He] has now realized that the brethren are NOT and have NOT been silent!”

And:

“…our Stake Pres mentioned in the Sat night session that a lot of the negative influences are coming from the press. He also stated that he was going to stop listening to most of the news, including Fox as he no longer felt the Spirit during many of their broadcasts. Our Stake Pres works for the Church in the Education Department and travels all over the World on various assignments from the Brethren.”

And this would be the crème de la crème of the bunch:

“Elder Bruce R. McConkie said in General Conference, I don’t remember which one, that the saints would experience greater future persecution than any they have experienced in the past. That seems to be the same prophecy that Elder Boyd K. Packer is making here. In the mouth of two or more witnesses are all things established. This is the Law of Witnesses.”

As these examples show, people were very much satisfied to hear such a strong “voice of warning,” indeed, a “prophecy.”

In response to this email, a different (good) friend of mine chimed in:

“Elder Packer seems to be hinting about upcoming trials.  That agrees with the scriptures.  His conclusion “The priesthood is with us and the gospel is with us as we live our lives as best we can does not agree with what the Savior told the Nephites about the church in our day.  This sounds like more “feel good” and “follow the Prophet” tripe.

The Lord warned us quite clearly what to expect “But if they will not turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, I will suffer them, yea, I will suffer my people, O house of Israel, that they shall go through among them, and shall tread them down, and they shall be as salt that hath lost its savor, which is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of my people, O house of Israel.” (3 Nephi 1:15)

The “they” and “them” here refers to the people of the latter-day Gentile church which has frittered away the Fullness of the Gospel.  These things spoken of by the Savior, and by Elder Packer, appear to be at our door.

Living our lives “as best we can”…if that means chasing the idols of Babylon as the large majority of LDS people have been doing for generations…won’t cut it.  The Lord told us that He will not protect the Gentiles (LDS people) “if they will not turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice”.  The scriptures agree with Elder Packer that things are going to get ugly very soon.  The scriptures do NOT support his assurances of forthcoming Divine protection for those within the LDS church who live “as best we can.”

“Why should we any longer jump and twitch, or even take much note, of the weak hints issuing forth from modern day leaders who have failed so significantly in their responsibility to WARN of the rapidly impending “calamity” when every two-bit internet prophet can now see what’s coming!”

Every pundit on the internet is also hinting at bad times coming.  It doesn’t take a prophet to see that the economy is continuing to crumble, despite the lying assurances issuing out of the White House.  The “hard times” foretold by the Savior will catch most people, including those in the church who don’t study the Book of Mormon, by complete surprise.”

As the author of “The Unwritten Order of Things,” I fail to see how his remarks are anything remarkable.  Because a guy (Packer) is in a position of authority that LDS members cling to with their entire belief system only appeals to those inclined to believe in a “doomsday” scenario, waiting with bated breath.  Then, flags and eyebrows are all raised and suddenly everyone pays attention to what’s going on.

If Packer (or anyone else for that matter) were to truly prophesy and call everyone to repentance, then figurative riots would happen in the streets.  But, then, calling us to repentance would more than likely condemn our participation in the City Creek Center and other Babylonian endeavors.

My thoughts?

I find it amusing how quick we jump when someone inside the church, but only when it’s a member of leadership, says how bad things are and how bad they may become in the future.  If you take the exact same words and put them in any other persons mouth the information is shoved to the side and its truthfulness questioned.  When Boyd states it, though, it’s prophecy, truth and such an “inspiring” “voice of warning.”

Talk about an amazing cult of personality we hold to.

But, only so amazing as this comment (emphasis is mine):

“Over the years, I have had a hard time understanding people who get so angry or upset at something the prophet says, and they even go against what the prophet or apostles say.

If you believe that the President of the Church is truly a prophet of God, wouldn’t you want to know what he says? There are times when I don’t know exactly what is the truth, or which way to look at a situation, but when the prophet, or apostles speak, that clarifies it for me. I want to know what the Lord wants or desires. If there is something I have trouble accepting or understanding, I pray about it in order to understand and/or accept, but I don’t go against it, or the prophet, or the church. I stand back until that understanding comes.

If you believe that the prophet really is a prophet of God, then we should follow him, and I do know that Pres. Monson is a prophet of God & Boyd K. Packer is an apostle.

How many times in the scriptures have we read that a prophet was writting what had been revealed to him, when the Lord forbids him to write more. I know that the general authorities know more than we do. How many times have they been told not to reveal more to the general church members? I have no idea, but I know that they know more than I do.”

Cue sarcasm:

As we gather round the TV and Internet for general conference, we should remember that “general authorities know more than we do” and that if we follow the prophets blindly, yay, stupidly (because they do know more than us) we will be blessed.  The Lord honors those who follow the “arm of the flesh” in faithfulness.  Hooray for blind obedience.

Perhaps Nephi might have something applicable to this situation:

And when I desire to rejoice, my heart groaneth because of my sins; nevertheless, I know in whom I have atrusted.  My God hath been my asupport; he hath led me through mine bafflictions in the wilderness; and he hath preserved me upon the waters of the great deep.  He hath filled me with his alove, even unto the bconsuming of my flesh. He hath confounded mine aenemies, unto the causing of them to quake before me.  Behold, he hath heard my cry by day, and he hath given me aknowledge by bvisions in the night-time.  And by day have I waxed bold in mighty aprayer before him; yea, my voice have I sent up on high; and angels came down and ministered unto me.   And upon the wings of his Spirit hath my body been acarried away upon exceedingly high mountains. And mine eyes have beheld great things, yea, even too great for man; therefore I was bidden that I should not write them.”[5]

But see, Nephi was wrong here.  He only thinks his support was his God.  In actuality, had he been alive when there were 15 prophets and apostles prophesying every time their mouths opened, he too would have put is support and trust in them.  Heck, I can’t believe anyone believes any differently.  How can you not follow lockstep when you have men who (a) know more than you, or I do and (b) are speaking scripture every time they open their mouths?

It’s sheer insanity to believe any differently.  The pathway is marked clear.  If you have any question, simply read declaration #1.  They can’t be led astray.  They can’t do wrong.  They are infallible.  They are our pope.  They define, interpret, give, state, utter, profess and state scripture whenever they speak.  They are scripture.  They are walking books of knowledge.  The Book of Packer – The Written and Unwritten Order of Things.  The Book of Monson – To The Rescue.  The Book of Nelson – The Story of  A Disciple of Armand Hammer.  And on and on.  Come on people, the scriptures state what, “when you awaken to the sense of your awful situation.”  You need to awaken and realize that your only salvation is in following the Brethren.  Anything else is diced tomatoes.  Anything else is chopped liver.  Anything else is insanity.

Repent, ye vile sinners for thinking that you should have a personal relationship with Christ or God when you have men to whom your allegiance belongs.  Smart men.  men way smarter and way more inspired than you ever could be.  Thus Saith Tom, return to your golden calves (or gray haired old men) and hear their counsel.  Follow their ways.  Build multi-billion dollar investments and be satiated with your spoils.  Thus ended Tom’s saith-ings.

End sarcasm.


[1] http://community.babycenter.com/post/a1883615/forest_bend_ward-president_packer.  Retrieved 09/27/2010.

[2] http://www.fairblog.org/2008/10/20/talk-by-president-boyd-k-packer-goes-viral/.  Retrieved 09/27/2010.

[3] See:  http://www.ldschurchnews.com/letters/

[4] Packer, Boyd.  09/12/2010.  Utah Multi-Stake Conference.  Allegedly.

[5] See:  2 Ne. 4:19-25.


“Illusion has more to do with what we act out than it does with what others do.

In overcoming illusion, we will be the ones who have changed.” —  Po Tai

Disclaimer:  I am posting this without permission.  This is the work of someone else, whose name I do not know, but whose writings I have appreciated.  I found it some year(s) ago in a few of my searchings and was reminded of it this evening.  I’m posting this in response to something asked of me.  You may find this article, as well as others by the same author, by following this link.  I do think what is put forth in this write-up is compelling enough to merit a wider audience and readership.  Whether or not you think so is entirely up to you.  😉  I reached out to the author some many months ago, and only briefly maintained contact with him.

His response to my email inquiry stated the following:

“I’m not participating in any blogs, nor do I have a facebook, twitter, or other social networking site.   These days, I am trying to find what I desire by simplifying my life rather than running with the herd.  Sometimes I feel an obligation to network more than I do.  I wonder if it has to do with my own growth or possibly helping others.

You might have already realized that when we try to get out of the box, there is a lot of pull from others on the inside of the box to keep us there.  So, why isn’t there some helping hand to help a struggling being to get out of the box?  It might be because we wouldn’t survive on the outside unless we struggle greatly in the process of hatching out.  So, those on the inside pull on us to keep us in while those on the outside let us struggle for our own good.  It’s a tough process.  Try to take courage if that is where you are.  The struggle brings strength which one needs at the next step and there is always a helping hand that emerges before we succumb in despair.  If you don’t already know, the hand will come out of nowhere when you least expect it.”

If anyone is interested in contacting him, please email me and I’ll pass along his email address.
Read on and enjoy:

==========================


The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the LDS Endowment

By Eleazar, 2004

This narrative is written to those who are struggling to understand meanings behind the LDS temple endowment. The endowment ritual is a highly symbolic act about which patrons generally admit they have little understanding.  This narrative will focus on the symbolic meaning of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  The intention is to stimulate further thought by presenting possible ways that the symbols of the endowment might be understood.  Other parts of the endowment ceremony will not be discussed, except where they are relevant to understanding the meaning of the Tree of Knowledge symbol.

As in other narratives written by this author, what follows comes with no claims of completeness, correctness, or authority.  Readers are free to disregard any or all of the ideas that follow and there is no expectation by the author that any of it be accepted as wisdom.  The author does not belong to any religion and the ideas presented in this narrative are not meant to be part of a belief system of any church, philosophical group, organization, or dogma.

In the simplest of terms, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil symbolizes illusion. Partaking of the fruit of the Tree represents losing oneself in the illusion.  Man consumes the illusion and is, in turn, consumed by it, so to speak, becoming carnal, sensual, and devilish.  Partaking of the fruit brings us under an illusion of knowledge.  This knowledge includes an illusionary belief in the opposition of all things that, in turn, brings about an experience of opposition, an unreal journey into the world of disharmony, bitterness, sorrow, and death.

As a result of carnal man’s (Adam’s) belief in the reality of opposites, illusions of death and hell become as real to him as does the illusion itself.  This illusory knowledge brings Adam under the curse (given for his sake) of the Fall of having to sweat (work) for his bread (bread symbolizing love of God) and he (as Eve) brings forth children (symbolizing his creations) in sorrow.  He continues in this bitter existence as one who is oblivious to what is truly going on, though he thinks he knows.  The illusion is as a veil that covers the mind of Adam. It prevents him from seeing things as they truly are.

The LDS endowment tells patrons what is really happening through its symbols.  These symbols tell patrons that they are the ones spoken of in the characters of the endowment.  The story of the Fall brought about by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge is about the present time.  Moreover, the creation parable is meaningfully symbolic of a process that is ongoing rather than part of our past.

Ultimately, carnal man is destined to pass from the curses of the Fall. In doing so, he will have achieved nothing because it was never about achievement. It was always about being. Adam was always doing that perfectly, notwithstanding having partaken of an illusion that had him thinking otherwise.  Adam chooses, rightly.  Notice the comma before rightly.  Adam will come to realize that what he has been doing underlies the very purpose for his existence, to re-create himself and then discover by experience what that means.  He will understand that his journey was not about achievement at all, but that it was about living, despite the experience of suffering, fear, and spiritual death that he has brought upon himself by choosing to partake of the illusion.

Meaning and symbolism. Although the subject of symbolism is covered in other narratives by this author, it may be helpful to make a brief statement on symbolism before proceeding with a discussion of what is symbolized by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Few people notice the profound symbolic meanings in the world surrounding them and this is also true in regard to the symbolism in the LDS endowment ceremony.  To come to understand the meanings, one must first come to notice that the symbols exist.  Next, one comes to ask what the symbols mean.  Looking at the meaning of symbols is where we presently are with this narrative.  Discovering the meaning of symbols is important because the endowment is filled with symbolic meaning.

Later, one will need to look beyond symbols and their meaning and begin to ask whence the symbols come.  When one begins to comprehend the answer to this last question, one finds the doorway that leads to understanding the mystery of all of creation.  Only then will carnal man come to discover himself and why he exists in the first place, notwithstanding he has been unknowingly discovering himself all along.  In his understanding of whence the symbols come, he will finally be able to comprehend what it means to believe all things.  As this occurs, such a person will no longer be bound by the illusion because he will be able to see beyond the lie to know what it is really about.

All is happening now. One of the barriers to comprehending the deeper meaning of symbols is misleading ourselves into believing symbols are about other times and places rather than here and now.  During the enactment of the LDS temple endowment ceremony, patrons are explicitly told that they are to ‘consider themselves as Adam and Eve.’ This is an important key to unlocking what the endowment parable means and it may be helpful to consider it further

Among endowment patrons there seems to be a tendency to perceive Adam and Eve as other people who lived in another time rather than see the endowment story being about them, the patrons.  Moreover, when patrons take time to consider the notion that they are Adam and Eve, there is a tendency for male patrons to identify themselves with Adam and female patrons with Eve rather than each patron seeing the meaning of both Adam and Eve in themselves.  A fuller meaning of the endowment will emerge when patrons begin to see the entire ceremony and all of the characters therein as meaningfully symbolic and relevant to themselves as individuals or, more specifically, individual temples.  It is all happening now, ‘in the temple this day’.  Ye are the temple spoken of.

There are several places in the endowment ceremony where the phrase ‘this day’ is used. Each use of this phrase is important.  Patrons may want to take time to notice each of them on their next time through the endowment.  The phrase ‘this day’ is meant to signify (symbolize) the present time and what is happening in the (true) temple by representing it in parallel symbolic names, tokens, signs, and names (all of which constitute parables).

However, the endowment message is not one that is flattering to the ego and it shouldn’t be.  There is a profound reason for this that few come to see until they let go of that which blinds them.  This is part of what the endowment message is about.

In perfect symbolism, the endowment tells patrons what is happening right now in a layer upon layer parallel.  What is going on in the temple this day is perfectly symbolic of what is going on in the temple this day.  That statement may sound foolish at first, but one might take time to notice that there are two temples being spoken of in parallel and one bespeaks the other.  That is, the temple as a symbol bespeaks the meaning of the true temple.  Ultimately, there is only one true temple and ye are the temple (being) spoken of.  What is happening in the temple endowment this day is symbolic of what is happening in you (the true temple) this day or, rather, the present moment of time.  It is a perfect parallel.

This is not without a lot of irony.  Moreover, the irony is profoundly symbolic of itself in what might be called an inside-out manner.  Patrons are truly meant to be ‘in the temple this day’, but few are, notwithstanding they are in a temple (the wrong one).  The entire point of it is missed.  Again, there are two temples and we should remember that we are the true temple, those that are built without hands.

Because we as endowment patrons miss the (true) meaning of temple, the symbolism of the endowment points out our failure and plays us as hypocrites and (spiritually) dead in glorious fashion.  Until the patrons come to understand what is going on and why it is this way, they will be rightly counseled to return to the temple often in to do the work for the dead.  The dead refers correctly to those who are spiritually dead that includes those who are present in the (false) temple this day.  The spiritually dead also includes many who are physically dead.  It should be noticed that the spiritually dead are the ones who are in a position to benefit most from the endowment.  It is all perfect in its symbolism and entirely appropriate, notwithstanding few will understand it at first and others may take offense at such a thought that it is meant for them, the patrons, as opposed to others not present.  For many, such an idea is damaging to the ego.  But, that is part of the problem.  The ego of carnal man keeps him blinded to truth that is right in front of him, or more importantly, in him.

Ultimately, temple patrons will come to see the profound meaning in acting out of the endowment ritual and see that it is much more.  Eventually, there is a realization that it is about them, here and now.  They may also come to realize that is something that has been going on about them in their everyday lives which not only includes the time in the temple (this day), but the ever present continuance of their existence in the (lone and dreary) world. In regard to this, one might take time to notice that the endowment begins with a presentation of the creation parable that includes the Fall of Adam and Eve and being cast into the lone and dreary world that is rightly said to be the one in which we live now.  Adam remains in this fallen condition throughout the ceremony and is said to enter the presence of the Lord only at the end of it, when Adam pierces the veil (of his own misunderstanding; illusion).  Although all patrons take part in this veil ceremony, few ever make it that far in their personal lives outside of the temple.

In a profound sense, patrons enter the temple for their endowment, but return home afterwards in the same state of self-delusion as when they entered, sometimes worse.  This is represented by how the ceremony ends as well as in the new clothing being worn (eg. the garment; a symbolic veil).  The endowment ceremony rightly ends at the veil because of the failure by patrons to pierce the real veil (ie. what it represents: illusion).  As a result, what is merely symbolized by passing the veil in the temple will not occur for them in their personal lives until such a time when they, as individuals, are ready to proceed.  When that occurs in reality, there will not be a need for them to return and do the work for the dead nor will they need to concern themselves with the symbols of the endowment.  They will then be living temples, those made without hands, and the buildings called temples will be seen as for what they truly are: symbols, tokens, names, signs, images, and illusions. In truth, all symbols, tokens, names, and signs are counterfeits.  They are not real, but only symbolize something that is real.

Lying, Lucifer, and illusions. Prior to moving onto a discussion of the meaning of the Tree of Knowledge as illusion, it may be helpful to discuss the idea of the character of Lucifer and lying.  There seems to be a lot of confusion in LDS doctrine about Lucifer being a liar as opposed to Lucifer as a teller of great truth and a being of great insight.  This latter idea is embodied to some extent in a popular LDS aphorism that ‘Lucifer can tell nine truths and one lie’.  One might consider the possibility that this aphorism embodies a lie, especially since it presupposes that Lucifer is a being of great intelligence (glory).  The truth is that Lucifer is just another spiritually dead being who doesn’t understand himself (doesn’t know himself) and is imprisoned by the same illusion that he merchandizes to Adam and Eve.

Adopting the idea that Lucifer tells truth in the temple keeps many from discovering the simplest secrets of the endowment.  It may be helpful to realize that everything that Lucifer says in the temple is a lie.  Another name for Lucifer is devil. It should be noted that in the New Testament, Jesus says of the devil that he “…abode not in the truth because THERE IS NO TRUTH IN HIM …he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar…” (John 8:44) (capitals added for emphasis).

One must be able to see how everything spoken by Lucifer in the temple is a lie in order to begin unraveling what the endowment symbols mean.  With this idea fresh in mind, we might now examine an interesting conversation that occurs between Eve and Lucifer in regard to the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil:

“LUCIFER:  Eve, here is some of the fruit of that tree.  It will make you wise.  It is delicious to the taste and very desirable.

EVE:  Who are you?

LUCIFER:  I am your brother.

EVE:  You, my brother, and come here to persuade me to disobey Father?

LUCIFER:  I have said nothing about Father.  I want you to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, that your eyes may be opened, for that is the way Father gained his knowledge.  You must eat of this fruit so as to comprehend that everything has its opposite:  good and evil, virtue and vice, light and darkness, health and sickness, pleasure and pain–thus your eyes will be opened and you will have knowledge.

EVE:  Is there no other way?

LUCIFER:  There is no other way.”

Since everything that Lucifer speaks is a lie, then:  (i) The fruit of the Tree is not delicious to the taste, nor is it desirable;  (ii) Lucifer is not Eve’s brother;  (iii) Lucifer did say something about Father;   (iv) Eating from the Tree will not open Eve’s eyes; (v) Eating the fruit is not how Father gained his knowledge;  (vi) There is no such thing as opposition in all things;  (vii) Eve will not have real knowledge (or wisdom) after eating the fruit; and  (viii) There is another way.

Since an examination of each of these in detail is too unwieldy for the purpose of this narrative, only brief comments will be offered.  However, even brief comments should suffice for those who are having difficulty seeing how all things claimed above by Lucifer are lies.

First, there is the promise (by Lucifer) that the fruit is ‘delicious to the taste and very desirable’.  One might inquire how good fruit would come from a corrupt tree, since corrupt trees should only produce corrupt fruit (see 3Nephi 14:17-18).  Maybe it is not good fruit at all.  Moreover, the  fruits (results) of eating the fruit seem to suggest that it is corrupt fruit.  Eating the fruit brings about the Fall, a sojourn in the lone and dreary world, and curses from God (eg. earning bread by sweat of face; bringing forth children in sorrow).  The true fruits of eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge are ignorance, loneliness, fear, sorrow, suffering, nakedness, and death.  These are a part of the experience of the Lone and Dreary World which is characterized by bitterness and misery.  Thus, the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge is not delicious to the taste, but far from it.

The rewards of eating the fruit can hardly be called desirable, despite the fact that Eve later proclaims it to be so in her statement that “It is better for us to pass through sorrow that we might know the good from the evil.” Readers might want to take time to consider what is really going on in this drama.  It should be noticed that Eve is making this statement after she has already partaken of the fruit and is therefore laboring under illusion.  Eve appears to be sincere in her belief that the fruit is desirable (ie. she believes the lie), but that doesn’t make the lie true.  Moreover, it should be noticed that Eve, because of her belief that the fruit is desirable, offers it to Adam in the similar way that Lucifer tempts Eve.  After eating the fruit, Eve, in effect, becomes Lucifer.  But, she is more effective too because she gets Adam to do what Lucifer could not.  In becoming fallen, Eve becomes a liar, so her claim that it is better to eat the fruit should also be taken as a lie.

Eve is not Lucifer’s brother.  Eve was created from the side of Adam, but Lucifer was not, meaning that he cannot be her brother in this regard.  In symbol, Eve represents the tabernacle for the Spirit or, rather, the body creation (as well as creation itself).  This is in contrast to Lucifer who, as a formerly great Spirit cast from heaven, represents the Fallen Spirit, the deceiver, or one who believes in illusion.

But, there’s more.  In LDS doctrine, Lucifer is portrayed as the brother of  Jesus.  The symbol of Jesus and Lucifer as brothers is intricately linked to creation itself, more specifically, the origin of duality (opposition; an illusion) and its subsequent war(s) between good and evil, agency and enslavement, yielding and force, life and death, Christ and anti-Christ.  This is reminiscent of the same in regard to the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall of man per the creation parable.  In this case, Eve symbolizes the proto-typical Lucifer rather than his sibling.  This is precisely why the representative color for Eve and Lucifer is red, the color of sensual passion and conflict.  It is also why Eve tempts Adam with the fruit in a parallel to Lucifer tempting Eve.

After Eve partakes of the fruit, she looks at Lucifer in apparent recognition and proclaims: “I know thee now. Thou art Lucifer, he who was cast out from Father’s presence for rebellion!” Again, it should be remembered that Eve is speaking after eating the fruit of the Tree, so this accusation she makes towards Lucifer is illusionary.  In truth, Eve hasn’t a clue as to who is Lucifer.  If she did, she might first come to see Lucifer in herself.  There is little question that is the role she was playing in offering the fruit of Knowledge to Adam.  But she is oblivious to that, having been blinded by partaking of the fruit of Knowledge herself.

In telling Eve that he is her brother, Lucifer communicated that they siblings from common parents.  Since Lucifer did not say he was ‘half brother’, Eve could have rightly responded using the phrase ‘our Father’ rather than how she did.  It is interesting that in the statement immediately after Lucifer’s denial of Father, he invokes the name of Father to add credibility to his claims.

Eve is promised that eating the fruit will open her eyes, she will have knowledge, and it will make her wise, but none of these occur.  Rather than find the peace and joy of true knowledge and understanding, Adam and Eve become fearful.  In their fear and lack of understanding, they hide themselves and make aprons to cover their nakedness.  Nakedness is a lie that Adam and Eve are conned into believing and the aprons they create are symbolic veils to use as a covering.  It may be helpful to notice parallels in what happens in the endowment.  Appropriately, endowment patrons are conned into believing that they too are naked.  They return from their work in the temple wearing garments that are meant to cover their nakedness.  This is despite nakedness being a con in the first place.

Lucifer tells Eve that eating the fruit is how Father gained his knowledge and also tells her that there is no other way.  This last statement is interesting in regard to passages in the scriptural cannon that Christ is the only true way to wisdom, understanding, and life eternal.  This stands in direct contrast to the way of eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge that Lucifer uses to supplant it.  Thus, eating the fruit of that Tree is not the way to knowledge, but the way to illusion.  The (true) Father could not have gotten his knowledge by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge because it is the wrong way.

The illusion of opposites. The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil represents illusion.  This illusion includes an illusory knowledge (a belief) in opposites.  Despite this idea seeming obvious, there seems to be a universal acceptance by temple patrons that a reality of opposition in all things is one of the great and noble truths of the Mormon religion.  To the contrary, believing in the reality of opposition is succumbing to the lies.

Here, it may be helpful to briefly examine the idea of opposition in all things.  In examining proposed opposites, one might notice that opposition to truth can’t be anything except a creation of the mind.  This, in turn, can only manifest itself as more illusion, since what is unreal can never give rise to that which is.

It may be helpful to consider how opposition is an illusion.  One might first accept that truth embodies that which truly exists and always has existed (ie. it is eternal).  That is, truth (reality) comprises ‘everything which is’.  Next one might inquire whether or not there can be an opposite to that.  The answer is (really) no, but (apparently) yes.  That is, there cannot (really) be an opposite to reality (what is), although there can indeed be an apparent (illusory) opposite to reality (what isn’t).  However, opposition in this case (‘that which isn’t’) is illusion (not real) by definition.  Thus, an opposite to truth cannot really exist in reality (since the opposite is illusion).  However, there can be an appearance of opposites.  Moreover, one can become bound (imprisoned) by illusion when one believes it is real.

At a risk of being too redundant, it may be helpful to state this again in another way.  The opposite of truth is falsehood and the opposite of ‘that which is’ is ‘that which isn’t’. However, ‘that which isn’t’ doesn’t really exist, except as an illusion.  ‘That which isn’t’ is nothing.  ‘That which isn’t’ doesn’t exist in reality except as an abstraction created in mind and believed.  When ‘that which isn’t’ becomes belief then a lie is born.  Lies are illusions by definition and illusions are lies.  They are not real, but they can be believed, making them appear real.  Thus, there is not really opposition to ‘that which is’, but there can be a belief that there is. Believing in illusion is be-living a lie, which is what the symbol of Lucifer (false light-bearer) is all about.  (Be)-Living in illusion is what is symbolized by partaking of the fruit of Knowledge.

In one sense, Lucifer is symbolically synonymous with the Tree of Knowledge.  Metaphorically, the tree produces (creates) corrupt fruit (lies; illusion) of which others can partake (believe).  If we partake of the corrupt fruit (illusion), then we in turn become corrupt trees bearing our own corrupt fruit.  It is rightly said that we reap the fruits of our labor.  Thus the fruits of eating corrupt (bitter) fruit is more corruption (bitterness) that returns to us as all things return to the creator.  This is why the Lone and Dreary World (in which we live now) is one of bitterness.  When we come to know ourselves, we will see why.  But there is more to this because we will come to know ourselves by our fruits.  Ultimately, we will come to know the world in which we live as our own creation.  Eventually, we will come to see why.

The ideas presented in the above paragraph have everything to do with why illusion exists in the first place.  It has a great purpose and that purpose is a continuing one, despite the appearance of it being divided (opposition).  Belief in illusion can never change reality, notwithstanding it can change the appearance of it.  This may be a difficult concept to fully grasp because one needs to get out of the illusion in order to see (perceive) it (the truth) clearly.  That is, the idea of how illusion fills its purpose will be fully grasped only after one fully emerges from it.  The illusion is not destroyed.  Nor need it be, since it is unreal (illusion) in the first place.  The illusion will continue to fill a purpose after Adam has emerged from it, but it will be a different one because opposition is not what it is really about.  Moreover, what Adam has been doing after becoming lost in the illusion is the same thing that he will do after he emerges from the Fall: Re-creating himself.  The illusion will not change, but Adam’s knowledge of himself will.

One of the great truths to be discovered when emerging from illusion is that things eternal are not obtained by great effort or as a result of achievement.  Anything eternal already exists right now, otherwise it would not be eternal.  This is why (eternal) life is said to be found and also why it is said to be free.  It’s (a) present (ie. a gift) now, notwithstanding few believe it to be so because of the illusion brought about by eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge which results in a belief in death.  One might notice the interesting symbolism in the word ‘evil’ which is ‘live’ spelled backwards, signifying death. ‘Devil’ is ‘lived’ spelled in reverse.  These refer to spiritual death as a (Fallen) state of mind that has one not living now.

The illusion of death. An important concept symbolized in the creation parable is the entrance of death into the world.  Death comes as a result of eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Since death comes from eating the fruit of Knowledge, it is an illusion.  But how so?  Death is something that people sincerely believe in.  But why?  Where does the idea of death come?

We might rightly consider (the illusion of) death to be something that we have created ourselves.   Carnal man has eaten the bitter fruit and produced bitter fruit of his own.  In a sense, death is a bitter fruit of eating bitter fruit.  But, the good news is that corrupt (bitter) fruit is exactly what it is.  That is, it’s just another illusion (lie) believed by the mind of carnal and fallen man.  Despite the sincere belief in death, it remains an illusion in reality, notwithstanding death takes on all of the pretense of reality in the carnal and Fallen mind which lives the illusion.

It is rightly said that there are two forms of death, physical and spiritual.  Physical death is defined as the separation of the spirit from the physical body (a vehicle) and spiritual death is being separate from God.  True to form, carnal man appears to obsess himself with the wrong form of death by thinking that physical death is his real enemy.  However, this is entirely appropriate because carnal man is lost in the illusion and he thereby gets everything inverted.  Carnal man obsesses himself with his physical body because he lives by the carnal senses that come through the body.  Carnal man tends to judge his entire existence by that which he believes. But the reality of it is that carnal man believes in carnality so he is entrapped by the carnal senses.  He believes in the body and identifies himself with it.  This is the very definition of carnal, sensual, devilish, symbolizing an obsession with the world of the outer (carnal) senses.

The illusionary world of the senses is the only reality that carnal man knows.  It might be noticed that this obsession with the sense-body is redundantly symbolized at many places in the scriptural cannon and is part of the message behind the symbols of man and woman.  Eve symbolizes the flesh (body) which tempts Adam (symbolizing the Spirit) to eat the fruit (of creation).  This entrapment of the Spirit by the material world of the carnal senses is symbolized by Eve enticing Adam to partake of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge . In the creation parable, she resorts to worldly reason as well as enticement.

However, there is something else that might be important to notice.  Eve is fooled into partaking of the fruit, but Adam appears to do it knowing it will bring about a Fall (Spiritual death; illusion).  Here it may be helpful to remember that Adam (Michael) symbolizes the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit cannot be deceived so it must make the choice to partake of illusion willingly.  In looking at parallels in the symbolism, one might notice that the ‘forgetting’ of Michael (ie. forgetting of who he really is) is accompanied by Adam’s entrance into the Terrestrial world and his subsequent uniting with Eve (symbolizing the creation) in marriage.  Here, Eve is Adam’s companion and helpmeet (that he might not be alone).  This coming of Michael to the Terrestrial world is in parallel to Adam willingly eating the fruit of Knowledge and subsequently being cast out into the Lone and Dreary (Telestial) world where he is imprisoned by the senses (carnality; represented by the symbol of the enticing of Eve).

At one level of meaning, there is only one Fall, at another there are two.  But, what is important here is understanding that partaking of the Fall at both levels is an event that is done willingly.  This has more to do with what is going on now than it has to do with what went on in the past.  The point of this story is how it applies to us.  It tells us who we are, where we are at the moment, and what we are doing.  Our obsession with physical death has everything to do with our entrapment in the sense-world of carnality, an illusionary world in the first place.  Physical death releases the Spirit from the tabernacle of the senses, but not necessarily from their bondage because the problem is really in his mind.  One must get out of the carnal mind to see that physical death is illusionary.  Adam will understand it when he starts to remember who he really is (Spirit).  In rising from carnality, Adam will see death as something he willingly buys into.

To the immortal Spirit, physical death is meaningless.  It merely separates from the body and lives on, being immortal.  The only death that can threaten the Spirit is Spiritual death that is brought about by having forgotten who it is.  Again, this is what the Fall is all about, buying into the illusion.  In partaking of the illusion (having forgotten who it is), the Spirit I-dentifies with the body and believes in the reality of (physical) death, oblivious to the Spiritual death that has just been created.  Spiritual death, unlike physical death, is something that is happening to Adam right now, notwithstanding it too is an illusion.

Spiritual death is separation from the Spirit, but is that something that really happens?  No.  It is just imagined to happen and it is Adam’s own (illusionary) creation.  There are two reasons Spiritual death cannot be real:   (i) God is unconditional love and unconditional love never abandons, and  (ii) It is impossible for Adam to not be who he is, despite his pretending.

It might first be noticed that Spiritual death is a one sided event.  That is, Adam cuts himself off from the Spirit, but it is not the other way around.  God continues to speak to Adam in (the symbols of) all of creation.  In reality, everything in creation is meaningfully about him (Adam).    Adam is really Michael who has forgotten that he is the Holy Spirit.  The Spirit cannot cut itself off from itself, notwithstanding it can believe so.

A profound idea that emerges from the endowment parable is that death, although illusionary, is a happening event.  Patrons are told in several different ways that they are dead, which of course, refers to the state of spiritual death (living under illusion).  That is a fundamental message of the endowment ceremony, but is almost universally missed by the patrons who return day after day to do the work for the dead, not realizing who’s work they really do.  The irony is that while the Eternal Spirit is speaking (from beyond the symbols of the endowment), few (patrons; Adam and Eve) appear to be listening.  That by itself is the textbook definition of spiritual death.  Again, it is a one sided event.  Adam cuts himself off from the Spirit when he becomes fallen and carnal.  Because of the illusion, he fails to hear what is really being said to him.  It is as profound as it can be.

Moreover, these same ideas are redundantly found all through LDS teachings for anyone who will take time to notice.  Here one might notice that LDS teachings say  “the Church is for the perfection of the Saints.” Yes, of course it is.   And that is why the church  is perfect;    It is because it fulfills its purpose and the measure of its creation.  But one might see a little more and ask if the Saints were perfect, then why is there a need for the church?   No, there wouldn’t be a need.   This statement about the purpose of the church is, in effect, an admission of spiritual death about those whom it serves.    It should be noted that it is because of (spiritual) death and its concomitant (dead) works that the church is given.  As stated in D&C 22:  “For it is because of your dead works that I have caused this last covenant and this church to be built up unto me, even as in days of old.”

Illusion and veils. In trying to understand the meaning of the fruit of Knowledge, it may help to notice other symbols with similar meanings.  The illusion symbolized by the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge is closely tied to the meaning of the veil of the temple.  It might be noticed that there is a redundancy that pervades this symbolism.  In the scriptural record there are a variety of names for the veil, all of which are synonymous in meaning:    the veil of unbelief, the veil of forgetfulness, the veil of darkness, the veil of death, and the veil of the temple.  These symbolize the separation of the bridegroom (Spirit) from the bride (creation), the Spirit from the Temple (which temple ye are), and spiritual death.

When passing through the endowment ceremony, one encounters several veils.  Women (symbolizing the creation) wear a veil to cover their faces (representing a separation from the Spirit; their husbands; Adam), patrons wear aprons and garments (to cover their nakedness), and a curtain (veil) separates the patrons from the Celestial Room.  These are tied together in meaning via symbolic parallel and redundancy.  Although several veils are presented, their meaning is directly relevant to individuals as temples and what is occurring in the present time and place.  Veils represent illusion by symbolizing barriers, coverings, and separation.  Creation of veils, wearing them, or standing at them, are symbolic of the same illusion symbolized by the Tree of Knowledge.

Endowment patrons first become aware of the veil of the temple that covers the Celestial room, despite that not being the first veil to which they are introduced.  The veil of the temple separates the outer court from the Holy of Holies (Celestial Room) as a symbol of the veil over the heart of the temple.  Since ye are the temple spoken of, it is symbolic of the state of spiritual death and illusion of those in attendance and is meaningfully synonymous with a familiar statement that patrons are prone to apply to others rather than themselves:  “… their hearts are far from me.”

More symbolism of veils is represented by the apron and the garment.  In these, there are some interesting parallels.  Adam and Eve make aprons for themselves after being conned into believing they are naked.  Endowment patrons readily don these aprons upon themselves without question when they are told to do so.  Adam and Eve sincerely believe that they are doing right by being obedient.  This takes another turn when Adam and Eve accept garments of skins that are meant to cover their nakedness, never once questioning the idea that the need for these coverings are founded upon a lie (fear; of being naked).  After all, God gave them the garment, so there is no reason to question that!  In living fully under the illusion, Adam doesn’t appear to have a clue as to what is really happening.

All of this is powerfully symbolic and perfectly appropriate.  To those who might not yet fully comprehend this idea, an important question might be posed:  Who is the God who gave you garments?  The question might be phrased another way:  “Who told you that you are naked?”

It may be helpful to notice that patrons obtain garments in a ceremony that is separate from the main presentation of the endowment.  Patrons afterwards proceed with the main endowment to don aprons that they wear over the top of everything they are given.  These are all profoundly symbolic, but the meaning of these things will not be discussed here because it digresses too far from the topic at hand.  In trying to understand these things, it is important to notice the ties to other parts of the presentation, more specifically, partaking of the fruit of Knowledge and the bondage it brings about.  One might especially notice that the symbols of the endowment are redundantly stacked inside one another in a fashion that is reminiscent of Russian dolls that have one doll stacked inside the other.  There is a lot of repetition by parallels.  As one considers the meanings of the endowment, one might take time to notice these repetitions, parallels, and redundancies.

In looking at the symbolism of the veil, it may help to notice that the many veils are relatively thin or constitute very poor coverings.  This is part of the profound symbolism of the temple . In emerging from his fallen and carnal state of being, Adam is destined to part all veils.  These veils will then fall back where they belong.  When that happens, veils will become as meaningless as all symbols.  It is not the symbols themselves that are meaningful, but what they represent.  What will have changed is Adam, not the veil.  Ultimately, Adam will lift the veil and recognize his own face looking back.  This is part of the symbolic meaning of the veil over the face of the woman (his bride).

The illusion of good versus evil. As previously discussed, the Tree is called Knowledge of Good and Evil symbolizes an illusion of opposition, a lie that is believed.   Carnal man lives under an illusion of having knowledge of good and evil so he doesn’t understand what is going on in the world in which he lives.  As a result of his belief in opposition, carnal man perceives the world about him in a context of conflict between good and evil.

To carnal man, the war between good and evil on earth is but a continuation of a War started long ago in Heaven.  Carnal man needs to consider that he is wrong and that he doesn’t understand the metaphor of a War in Heaven.  Good doesn’t need to war against evil because evil is an illusion in the first place believed to be real by evil.  The wars of carnal man are his own creation;  He made them in heaven.  In reality, these wars are evil versus evil.  The dead always do the work for the dead.

It may be helpful to first notice the premises that one must adopt in order to accept the popular interpretation of a War in Heaven.  A popular view is that good and evil are two opposing forces of near-equal strength meeting in battle.  But what is this premise really saying?  Many who consider themselves true followers of God will proclaim that God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent (ie. all powerful, all knowing, ever present).  The problem is that few will take time to consider that such a God can never be threatened by anything.  In thinking that there is an equal opposing force (evil) to God, then what is one really saying about evil?

Part of the problem lies within carnal man himself.  The blindness that comes from eating the fruit prevents us from seeing what IS in the first place.  Carnal man thinks that since there is a conflict, there must be opposites at work.  One side must be evil, so the other must be good;  Good versus Evil, opposites.  Carnal man has knowledge of opposites at work, or so he thinks.  The truth is that he gets things inverted, putting first for last and last for first.  He really doesn’t have knowledge, as he believes he does, but un-belief (isn’t-belief).

Carnal man’s un-belief is compounded by thinking that he is the one representing good, standing up against evil.  He may even perceive himself as the only thing that prevents evil from overcoming good.  He believes that to win in a conflict, good must overcome evil by meeting it headlong in battle.  Thus good must play the same game as evil to beat it.  The perspective of carnal man might be summed up in the popular saying attributed to Edmond Burke that “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” Carnal man’s failure to understand what is going on keeps him in a perpetual state of conflict (which he himself has created).  This state of being is symbolized in the curse upon Eve that she will bring forth children (creations) in sorrow.  The carnal mind is at work and it is under illusion.  Adam is creating the world in which he lives, but he can’t seem to understand what is really happening.  Yes, Adam always chooses, rightly.  Again, be sure to notice the comma before rightly.

As carnal man emerges from his illusion, he will remember the meaning of eternal.  He will realize that whatever is eternal must be a part of him right now.   If life is eternal, then how can it be taken?    The real truth is that eternal life can’t be given up, but it can appear to be.  Adam has nothing to lose, except illusion.  He was never naked in the first place.

The illusion of victim-hood. One of the truths that emerge from the story of eating the fruit is in regard to victim-hood.  The descent of Adam and Eve into the Lone and Dreary World is popularly perceived as being victims of a greater mind (Lucifer) and a con that originates outside of themselves.  Carnal man is always blaming others from what he has done himself.  However, other symbols in the endowment proclaim that the veil which blinds Adam’s mind is his own creation.  This is symbolized at least in three places,  (i) Michael as a creator of the earth,  (ii) Adam and Eve making themselves aprons (veils), and  (iii) Adam knowingly partaking of the fruit.  Endowment patrons are prone to see these events as part of a Divine Plan, a foreordained path that is traveled by those who are destined to meet all they are required to achieve salvation.  Patrons might consider these notions to be a product of the carnal mind that interprets everything in worldly terms.  Adam’s own misconceptions lead him to a feeling of betrayal when he finally comes to realize that the church and its leaders have played the role of Lucifer and his hirelings in the worldly drama erroneously called life (which is really spiritual death).  Adam will eventually stop playing the blame game because he will see that he himself is the originator of the illusion that binds him.

As carnal man begins to tire of the illusion he created, he will begin to remember. What is remembered is not so much as something that has gone on in the past as it is what is going on presently.  Remembering means to put it back together (re-member), re-create, and heal.  The meaning of re-membering has everything to do with the symbol of resurrection and overcoming (the illusion of) death.

As carnal man emerges from illusion, he begins to realize that what he was doing is what he is meant to be doing, notwithstanding his (former) sorrow (suffering).  He will begin to understand the purpose of the illusionary nature of creation and that it is perfect.  Fallen man will emerge from his suffering to find life.  Moreover, he finds that eternal life is not earned as a reward for his great effort, but that it has always been there waiting for him.  Eternal life has always been a present (gift) in the ever-present (now).  Carnal man never needed to descend into illusion.  He chose to.

The face in the mirror. The LDS endowment is a highly symbolic act filled with deep and profound meaning.  In coming to understand the endowment, there is a great truth awaiting:   The endowment is all about you. When patrons fathom the deep meaning of that simple statement, they will come to find true knowledge rather than be bound by an illusion of having knowledge.  As Adam comes to know himself, the creation parable will no longer be viewed as a past event of forgotten history.  It will be seen as a process that is happening right now.

Ultimately, Adam will learn that true knowledge comes from knowing himself.  Moreover, knowing ourselves is not an event as much is it is an ongoing process in which we are continually discovering ourselves.  This is what eternal life is truly about.  Michael, an individualized part of the Eternal Spirit, discovers who he really is through a process of re-creation.  The true glory of the creation (illusion) is that it provides a means by which he can do this.

Metaphorically, creation is as a mirror in which Michael, as Adam, peers so that he can see himself.  What Adam sees in the mirror is a reflection of his own face, which face he cannot see otherwise.  The purpose of the mirror is that Adam may find (see; discover) himself.  Discovering oneself anew doesn’t require getting lost in the mirror’s image, although some may choose to do that to experience what it means.  Eternal life is meant to be an ongoing event of re-creation and discovery.   Michael (God; Spirit) forgets who he is so that he may re-create himself anew and then discover by experience what that means.  It is not about what ‘was’ at all, but about what ‘is’.  Eternal life is not something that is bestowed upon Adam at some future date, but it is something he, as Michael, already had.   It is an ongoing  process of discovery.  Eternal life is happening to you (Adam/Eve) right now, even if it is disbelieved.

As Michael/Adam re-creates himself, the world around him changes.  It is in  similitude of the image in the mirror that moves when we do.  We are faced with what we have created which is a reflection of what we are.  It is not so much about others as it is about us.  When Adam tires of what he has created, he changes (recreates) himself.   There is a surprise in the process that can only be discovered by experiencing it.   In recreating himself anew, Adam always discovers more than he imagines.  This is the life more abundant.


“Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.  And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall ahear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people’s aheart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their beyes they have cclosed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should dheal them.”

– Matthew 13:13-15

The web is supposedly abuzz about the new Mormon.org site.  Supposedly.  Today, for the first time, I visited the site.  I only went there because I read an interesting article on the church’s new advertising campaign and thought I might as well go and see what the fuss was all about.

I went there to check out a few of the “profiles.”  The “meet Mormons” drop down menu allowed me to pre-select what I was looking for, so I trolled around to see if I could meet someone who might as well be me.  A male, age 25-34.  The first guy I met was named “David Rex” who just happens to be a Mormon “because it’s true.”  He also lives his faith “like [he] mean[s] it.”  The next dude I found was Brandon, who “loves cities” and is “a Mormon.”  He’s also a Mormon because “[his] membership in the church makes [him] happy.”  Another guy is a Mormon because “as [he] makes a correct decision, [he] feels good inside and feel[s] that [he has] made God proud.”  Lastly, I met someone named Michael who had a beaming smile.  I’m a sucker for big, cheesy grins.  He believed in the Word of Wisdom because, according to him, the Lord stated in Section 89 of the D&C that “hot drinks (meaning tea and coffee), tobacco, and alcohol are not good for the human body.”  Go ahead.  Read Section 89 and see if it says all that.  A mix of the favor line rational, questionable understandings about what Section 89 does and does not say, and happy feelings.  Ah, the world is happy this morning.  And, I might joyfully add that it didn’t take much searching to come up with these examples.  Less than 5 minutes provided me with more than enough reading for today.

Though it might be amusing to peruse a few more, that really wasn’t the point of this write-up.  This was mostly in response to a Deseret News article on this new ad campaign.  That campaign is what brought about the new Mormon.org profile pages, trying to connect individual members with individual non-members.  The new Hyde Park, town square, as it were.  The campaign includes billboards, TV, radio, bus platforms and other ways to entice strangers to find their way to Mormon.org and hopefully peruse more than a few of these profiles to see just what makes mormons tick.  While that may or may not be noteworthy, I found the process that brought about this campaign rather insightful.

Just how did the church arrive at this decision to “advertise” itself across a few handfuls of markets in the united states?  Surely it was revelation from heaven, you jest?!  No, not revelation.  There’s a better way to find a way to “advertise” the church:  public perception.  Nice, right!?

Yes, the Deseret News article mentions that this ad campaign “evolved solely from public reaction.”  Scott Swofford, the director of media for the church, likewise used similar wording to describe from whence came this campaign:  “the evolution has been interesting …  for 25 years (the church) has been doing advertising … out of that research evaluating whether the advertising was effective came [the new campaign.”  So, from both the Deseret News and Swofford we find out that this new advertising was an evolution that was 25 years in the making and is based “solely” off of public reaction.  The only comment to the article summed it up succinctly, “Now WE are getting there … ‘Every Member a Missionary’.”  Yes, every member a marketing, advertising missionary that takes 25 years to evolve his or her message to a point where they can bring out a new advertising campaign.  And, no doubt the church correlation department would be rather excited to report that “you will find [the profiles] are very unified in the understanding of what they believe.”  And though it might be fun to celebrate how well correlation has been received, the reasons behind this campaign should get a little more press.

In order to gauge the effectiveness of this campaign, which has increased site traffic to Mormon.org some 300%, one might (like Swofford did) rightfully ask how it might be gauged.  Because, like the Little Prince stated those many years ago, “Grown-ups like numbers.  When you tell them about a new friend, they never ask questions about what really matters.  They never ask:  “What does his voice sound like?” “What games does he like best?” “Does he collect butterflies?”  They ask:  “How old is he?” “How many brothers does he have?” ” How much does he weigh?” “How much money does his father make?”  Only then do they think they know him.”  That Little Prince may have been on to something with that reasoning, and certainly the church can’t gauge the financial success of this advertising campaign for a few years or so.  Maybe 25.

Swofford interjects with his reasoning that it’s “too early to project” how useful the advertising will be – and truly it is too early for us to see when “seeing, we see not.”  Though I may not be someone who believes in animal cruelty, and though this issue may be a dead horse here in the blogosphere, it nevertheless begs to be discussed.  Whereas biblical and book of mormon prophets came from obscure places, and quite often resisted giving the message the audience needed to hear, now we have opinion polls, focus groups and the like which shapes the very message others see.  As some have mentioned elsewhere, now is indeed the great day of opinion polling and focus group directed marketing.  Image management is everything in this day of deceit and as a result the vision suffers and we’re left to years and years of research to figure out what’s right and how to go about our business.

I’m almost appalled that the vision is so guided by the public that we craft, gear towards and manage “advertising” campaigns based on an evolutionary process that takes 25 years to come to fruition and only then is based solely off the public.  And, yes, the church is even calling it an “advertising campaign.”

Though I have more than a few personal misgivings about Helen Keller, the following quote sums this article up nicely:

“The most pathetic person in the world is someone who has sight, but has no vision.” – Helen Keller

Finishing up that scripture noted above, in Matthew 13:

“But blessed are your aeyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.  For verily I say unto you, That many aprophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them”. – Matthew 13:16-17

May mine eyes see, and my ears hear.  While others may rely on the research and focus groups to show them how to proceed, perhaps we as individuals should take a slightly different approach and seek to have our eyes opened that they might see.