Lamb-Skin about their Loins- No Lamb in Mesoamerica!
Quick Summary: I find it difficult to ignore the symbolism of the sheepskin, especially in North America. Starting in the days of Adam, [Missouri] men were required to offer a blood sacrifice to God—an unblemished, first-born male animal, which of course, was symbolic of the sacrifice of the coming Christ. Then Jesus fulfilled this law and ended the need for blood sacrifice:
——————–
Full article from source:
I find it difficult to ignore the symbolism of the sheepskin, especially in North America. Starting in the days of Adam, [Missouri] men were required to offer a blood sacrifice to God—an unblemished, first-born male animal, which of course, was symbolic of the sacrifice of the coming Christ. Then Jesus fulfilled this law and ended the need for blood sacrifice: And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away. . . . And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost. (3 Nephi 9:19–20). For Christ is the Lamb of God, and the Good Shepherd.
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/image-6.png?resize=196%2C300&ssl=1 196w” sizes=”(max-width: 470px) 100vw, 470px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
Annotated Book of Mormon by David Hocking and Rod Meldrum Page 533
Purchase Today!
“and they were naked, save it were a skin which was girded about their loins…” (Alma 43:20)
“And it came to pass that they did come up to battle; and it was in the sixth month; and behold, great and terrible was the day that they did come up to battle; and they were girded about after the manner of robbers; and they had a lamb-skin about their loins, and they were dyed in blood, and their heads were shorn, and they had head-plates upon them; and great and terrible was the appearance of the armies of Giddianhi, because of their armor, and because of their being dyed in blood (3 Nephi 4:7).
It’s interesting that the robbers had lamb-skin. The Nephites hadn’t left their animals, and the robbers were accustomed to living by plunder, so where did the lamb-skin come from? The logical inference is that they had saved lamb skin from previous raids, possibly for clothing in the winter. Of course, this means the Nephites kept lambs in their herds, which is to be expected since they observed the law of Moses.
Although they “had a lamb-skin about their loins,” the robbers also wore armor. The text says they came to battle in the sixth month, which the Jewish calendar would put in August or September.
The Nephites fought the robbers with a “great and terrible” slaughter, “insomuch that there never was known so great a slaughter among all the people of Lehi since he left Jerusalem” (3 Nephi 4:11). The Nephites chased the robbers to the borders of the wilderness.” Moroni’s America page 216
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-4.jpg?resize=225%2C300&ssl=1 225w” sizes=”(max-width: 192px) 100vw, 192px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
If I was a Gaddianton and wanted to destroy the Nephites I would cause a greater pain than physical. I would hit them at the very core of their belief system. For example if an Anti-Mormon desecrated my Sacred Garment, or repeatedly said the name of Deity in vain, that would be more difficult for my spirit to feel and thus hurt me even more than physical pain.
We understand how sacred the Lamb is in the Jewish tradition, and the shedding of blood on the cross, and a symbolic apron given to Adam? I believe the Gaddiantons are using those sacred symbols as disrespect to the Nephites trying to arouse the Nephites even more to hate them and fight them. The Gaddiantons are ridiculing and mocking and being sacrilegious with those things that are very sacred to the Nephites.
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/loin.jpg?resize=300%2C124&ssl=1 300w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/loin.jpg?resize=768%2C318&ssl=1 768w” sizes=”(max-width: 580px) 100vw, 580px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
Annotated Book of Mormon by David Hocking and Rod Meldrum Page 533
On a side note, we know there were no sheep or goats in Central America, during the time of the Nephites, so with the sheep being such a sacred symbol during the Law of Moses, would the Lord offer substitution for another animal such as the caribou or llama? (Why do I mention a Caribou? Because Mesoamericanists do). I don’t think so. The Nephites lived in the North American Land of the Book of Mormon. The Lord wouldn’t guide Lehi to a land that doesn’t have sheep, goats, oxen, and doves, would He?
i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/thumbnail-4.jpg?resize=300%2C300&ssl=1 300w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/thumbnail-4.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1 150w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/thumbnail-4.jpg?resize=50%2C50&ssl=1 50w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/thumbnail-4.jpg?resize=250%2C250&ssl=1 250w” sizes=”(max-width: 481px) 100vw, 481px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
New Podcast Here
Sheep or a Caribou?
Does this young Caribou look like a young Lamb?
About sheep in Central America, I quote from The Interpreter a Mesoameriica blog by Daniel Sorensen. “A second challenge for Bible translators has to do with translating animal names in the Biblical languages into target languages. In some languages this poses fewer difficulties, but in others this can pose interesting challenges. As an example from the New Testament, Jesus is said to have been moved with compassion on the multitude because “they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd” (Matthew 9:36). A Greenlandic translation made in 1744 renders sheep as “small animals which are nearly like caribous.” Inge Kleivan explains that, The comparison may at first sight appear astonishing, but in fact Poul Egede [the 1744 translator] has chosen the animal which is nearest to the sheep in size, appearance, and behavior if he wanted to compare the sheep with an animal which the Greenlanders knew. There were only the following land animals in West Greenland: hares, foxes, caribous, and polar bears. The comparison is, however, unsatisfactory at a very important point, because the caribous are not tame animals and the pastoral culture which pervades the Bible was quite unknown to the Greenlanders.33” Source
i0.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep9.jpg?resize=300%2C212&ssl=1 300w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
These caribou can substitute for a Lamb?
Editors note: Wow, no sheep; the most sacred emblem as a representative of Christ himself, and all Mesoamerica has is a caribou? Oh no, that’s in Greenland which is North America correct? Here is another opinion from Book of Mormon Central.
Mesoamerica Opinion: “Possible that the translated word “lamb” refers to a similar animal found in the New World”
“While the fierce appearance of the warriors would have been frightening, it may have been the lamb-skins and their being dyed in blood that was the most disturbing.2 Early in the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites were known to shave their heads and dress only in a skin about their loins,3 yet this scripture uniquely identifies the army as wearing a lamb-skin, possibly a new choice in garment that was particularly appalling to the Nephites. Perhaps the Gadianton robbers had girded themselves with a “lamb-skin” and had dyed themselves in blood as a visual mockery of the sacrificial Lamb of God.” (Good idea but Mesoamerica doesn’t have sheep right?
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep12-1.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1 150w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep12-1.jpg?resize=50%2C50&ssl=1 50w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep12-1.jpg?resize=250%2C250&ssl=1 250w” sizes=”(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
Editors note: Why not substitute llamas for sheep? “The camel, the hare, the llama, the rock badger, and the pig. These are the animals that possess only one of the two criteria required in order to be acceptable as food in the Law of Moses. “The llama is indeed a ruminant [chews the cud] whose hoofs are not cloven.” Food Regulation in Biblical Law A Paper Submitted in Satisfaction of the Written Work Requirement of Harvard Law School By Wendy Ann Wilkenfeld
BOMC continues, “The terms “lamb” and “sheep” appear in the Book of Mormon text over a hundred times, used most often in religious metaphors, such as with the phrase “Lamb of God.” 4 While there is some evidence of sheep in the Americas, 5 it is also possible that the translated word “lamb” refers to a similar animal found in the New World. 6 Whether the Nephites had sheep in the New World, or whether the word “lamb” refers to a different animal, the usage of “lamb” in the Book of Mormon is more often connected with Jesus Christ than it is to a specific species of livestock. 7
(Note 5 from Book of Mormon Central quote above) For evidence of “sheep” in the New World, see Wade E. Miller, Science and the Book of Mormon: Cureloms, Cumoms, Horse and More (Laguna Niguel, CA: KCT & Associates, 2010), 43–48. Wade E. Miller and Matthew Roper, “Animals in the Book of Mormon: Challenges and Perspectives,” Interpreter Blog, April 21, 2014; For evidence of the remains of a young domestic sheep in western New York, see William A. Ritchie, The Archeology of New York State (Garden City, NY: Natural History Press, 1969), 242–243
Editors note: As you can see from the Note 5 above, Book of Mormon Central uses a reference book about New York Archaeologist William A. Ritchie to verify that Mesoamerica had sheep. They are making things up and claiming sheep in New York proves there were sheep in Mesoamerica.
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep.jpg?resize=203%2C300&ssl=1 203w” sizes=”(max-width: 302px) 100vw, 302px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?resize=126%2C300&ssl=1 126w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C1833&ssl=1 768w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?resize=643%2C1536&ssl=1 643w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?resize=858%2C2048&ssl=1 858w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C2444&ssl=1 1024w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-3-scaled.jpg?w=1072&ssl=1 1072w” sizes=”(max-width: 183px) 100vw, 183px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?resize=262%2C300&ssl=1 262w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?resize=768%2C878&ssl=1 768w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?resize=1343%2C1536&ssl=1 1343w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?resize=1791%2C2048&ssl=1 1791w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?resize=1024%2C1171&ssl=1 1024w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?w=1280&ssl=1 1280w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep00-scaled.jpg?w=1920&ssl=1 1920w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
How does this above list of ancient animals in NY validate ancient sheep in Mesoamerica?
i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep21.jpg?resize=300%2C198&ssl=1 300w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
Kipp Island NY. Ceramic Dates 310 AD
Kipp Island, Hunters Home, and the Point Peninsula Tradition
The Kipp Island and Hunters Home sites are both located north of the Finger Lakes region of Central New York State. Most of the Kipp Island site has been destroyed by canal work, adjacent marsh drainage, damming, highway construction and many years of collectors digs (Ritchie 1944, 1965; Ritchie & Funk 1973). Accordingly, Ritchies excavations in 1963 were concentrated on the southern remnant of the island, where he discovered some habitation features and a cemetery respectively attributed to the Kipp Island and Hunter’s Home phases of the Point Peninsula cultural tradition. These cultural identifications were made on typological grounds and were supported by two radiocarbon dates of A.D. 610±100 and A.D. 895±100, both derived from charcoal found in hearth features (Ritchie & Funk 1973:155). Earlier occupations dating from the Middlesex and Squakie Hill phases were also identified on the site but were absent from the area excavated by Ritchie.
The Hunters Home site, discovered and partly dug by an amateur archaeologist, was later visited by Ritchie who opened a 268 square foot trench in a nearby refuse midden (Ritchie 1965: 258). The site also contains some pits and burials but there is no radiocarbon date for this site. Unfortunately, as was the case with Kipp Island, Ritchie does not say much about excavation procedures, stratigraphy, and exact provenience of the artifacts discovered at Hunters Home.
i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-24.jpg?resize=300%2C165&ssl=1 300w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-24.jpg?resize=1024%2C563&ssl=1 1024w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-24.jpg?resize=768%2C422&ssl=1 768w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-24.jpg?resize=1536%2C845&ssl=1 1536w, i2.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/sheep-24.jpg?w=1280&ssl=1 1280w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” />
BOMC continues,”Since the Nephites practiced the Law of Moses, they would presumably have preferred to have an animal equivalent 8 to a lamb in order to perform sacrificial ordinances at the temple. 9 Thus, when 3 Nephi 4:7 describes the skin as a “lamb-skin,” it may be a reference to the New World equivalent of a sacrificial lamb. 10 In fighting the armies of the Nephites, Gadianton robbers’ slaughtering and wearing the skins of an animal of holy sacrifice would certainly have been a jarring image for the Nephites.
Fierce Gaddianton Warriors not in Lamb Skin in Mesoamerica.
The shock-factor of the lamb-skin is heightened when put in the context of Mesoamerican intimidation tactics. The donning of animal pelts was intended to create a fearful spectacle, 11 so it may have been unexpected for the Gadianton robbers to appear in the skins of a non-aggressive herbivore—like a lamb. Brant Gardner explained, “Mesoamericans were well known to wear animal skins, though the animal would typically be a ferocious jaguar, not a peaceful ‘lamb.’”12
While this unusual choice of a lamb (or a similar animal) may not have been terrifying for surrounding Mesoamerican cultures, the blood-stained pelt of an innocent lamb was clearly “great and terrible” (3 Nephi 4:7) to the temple-oriented Nephites. 13 If the objective of the Gadianton Robbers was to stun and terrify the armies of the Nephites, the sacrilege of a slaughtered sacred symbol would surely accomplish just that.” Book of Mormon Central Why Did the Gadianton Robbers Wear a Lamb Skin? Post contributed by BMC Team September 20, 2016 KnoWhy #191
i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/loin1.jpg?resize=300%2C294&ssl=1 300w, i1.wp.com/www.bofm.blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/loin1.jpg?resize=50%2C50&ssl=1 50w” sizes=”(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px” data-recalc-dims=”1″ />
3 Nephi 4:7
And it came to pass that they did come up to battle;
and it was in the sixth month;
and behold, great and terrible was the day
that they did come up to battle!
And they were girded about after the manner of robbers:
and they had a lamb-skin about their loins,
and they were dyed in blood,
and their heads were shorn,
and they had head-plates upon them;
and great and terrible was the appearance
of the armies of Giddianhi because of their armor,
and because of their being dyed in blood!
Purchase Today
“The Nephites observed the Law of Moses by sacrificing lambs during Passover. The Lamanites possibly mocked the Nephites and their religion by wearing a lamb-skin about their loins “dyed with blood…” (3 Nephi 4:7). The Lamanites might have killed Nephite lambs, then wore and displayed the lamb-skin as an act of defiance and sacrilege to the Law of Moses during battles with the Nephites” – Amberli Nelson.
THE LAMBSKIN APRON
SHORT TALK BULLETIN – Vol.V November, 1927 No.11 by: Unknown
In Masonic symbolism the Lambskin Apron holds precedence. It is the initial gift of Freemasonry to a candidate, and at the end of life’s pilgrimage it is reverently placed on his mortal remains and buried with his body in the grave.
Above all other symbols, the Lambskin Apron is the distinguishing badge of a Mason. It is celebrated in poetry and prose and has been the subject of much fanciful speculation. Some Masonic writers have contended that initiation is analogous to birth, or our advent from prenatal darkness into the light of human fellowship, moral truth and spiritual faith. Much ancient lore has been adduced in an effort to show that the Lambskin Apron typifies regeneration, or a new life, and this thought of resurrection may be the cause of its internment with the body of a deceased brother. At least it will serve until a better reason is advanced for this peculiar custom in the Masonic burial service. The association of the lamb with redemption and being born again is expressed by John, the Apocalyptic Seer, who had a vision on the Isle of Patmos, and beheld the purified and redeemed “Of All Nations, Kindreds, People and Tongues.” Of them it was said, “These are they which came out of great tribulation and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”…
As a badge of honor, the Lambskin Apron spells out integrity, honesty of purpose, probity of character, and soundness of moral principle. Source
Behold, I will put a fleece of wool in the floor; and if the dew be on the fleece only, and it be dry upon all the earth beside, then shall I know that thou wilt save Israel by mine hand, as thou hast said. (Judges 6:37)
Did the Lord Reject the Fig Leaf Apron?
Q. Why do Mormons wear aprons in the Temple, which represent the fig leaves worn by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, when it is obvious that God rejected the apron of fig leaves?
A. (by Michael W. Fordham) Latter-day Saints view the temple as a sacred place, and as such, we don’t discuss many things about the temple ordinances outside of the temple. There are things that the Lord deems as sacred. The teachings of the Lord to the eleven Apostles after His resurrection and before His ascension could be considered one example (see Acts 1:3). I make this point only to demonstrate why I won’t be going into any lengthy discussion on the Temple ceremonies, per se.
Additionally, everything about the temple is symbolic, from the architecture to the ordinances performed within. Remembering this symbolic perspective is important, not unlike the parables Jesus taught, as you consider my answer to your question.
Your question is based upon an assumption that is never mentioned in the scriptures. The Bible never says that God rejected the fig leaf aprons Adam and Eve wore. Let’s examine what actually took place in the Garden of Eden.
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (Genesis 3:4-5)
Notice that Satan told Eve that their “eyes shall be opened,” giving reference to knowledge, not eyesight. This means that Adam and Eve now had knowledge. The Lord has used the symbolic use of our eyes and ears in reference to foolishness and rebelliousness. They had eaten of the “tree of knowledge of good and evil”, thus they became knowledgeable about the difference between good and evil.
And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil. (Genesis 3:22)
This symbolic teaching is not unique to the Adam and Eve account (see Ezekiel 12:2, Matthew 13:15-16). After both Adam and Eve had partaken of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, indeed, both of their eyes were opened.
And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. (Genesis 3:7)
They understood that it was not good to be naked all the time. There is a difference between the ideas that Adam and Eve “saw” their nakedness and that they “knew” their nakedness was not necessarily good, at all times and that modesty was to play a part in their lives.
Adam and Eve then hid when they heard the voice of the Lord and only came out, when asked by the Lord,
And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself. (Genesis 3:8-10)
Adam, in response to this question by the Lord, blamed Eve for their transgression, and Eve, in turn blamed Satan. Did the Lord Reject the Fig Leaf Apron?
Girded about with a Lambskin
Journal of Book of Mormon Studies Volume 6 | Number 2 Article 7 7-31-1997 Matthew B. Brown Brigham Young University
This perspective may help explain the warning given by the Lord to his disciples to beware of “false prophets which come to you in sheep’s clothing” (Matthew 7:15). In Zechariah 13:4 we learn that false prophets were in the habit of dressing in the same distinctive vestments worn by the true prophets in order to deceive the people with their message. This is also reminiscent of 2 Corinthians 11:13-14, where we learn that false prophets somehow “transform” themselves to be like the Lord’s apostles just as “Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light” (emphasis added). Curiously enough, Joseph Smith taught that one of the ploys Satan uses to deceive others into thinking that he is an “angel of light” is ‘ that he wears “holy garb. “65 This leads us directly back to the circumstances surrounding 3 Nephi 4:7 and a possible explanation for why the lambskin apparel is mentioned there.
Notes:
65– He, 4:573. “These evil ‘angels’ use deception as their main tool of
destruction. They simulate all that is good. . . . Sometimes they may come as
angels of light, in borrowed or stolen raiment. Always they fail to reveal
themselves as they are.” John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1960), 108-9.
66– Daniel C. Peterson, “The Gadianton Robbers as Guerrilla Warriors,”
146, and “Notes on Gadianton Masonry,” 204, 212, both in Warfare in the Book of Mormon.
67– Victor Ludlow, “Secret Covenant Teachings of Men and the Devil in
Helaman through 3 Nephi 8,” The Book of Mormon: Helaman through 3 Nephi 8, According to Thy Word, ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr.
Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing
Thirteen years after the Book of Mormon’s final mention of the leather apparel (see 3 Nephi 4:7), the Lord personally warned his followers to beware of false prophets who would approach them in “sheep’s clothing” (3 Nephi 14:15). This could be seen both as metaphorical language and as an identifying characteristic of the Nephite’s enemy. Alma 43:20 mentions that some among the Nephite’s enemy were accustomed to wearing “a skin which was girded about their loins.” A few verses earlier we learn that the enemy consisted of dissenters, apostates, and “descendants of the priests of Noah” (Alma 43: 13). Daniel Peterson has noted several times that the Gadianton robbers should be viewed as “a n alternative religious option within Nephite society. “66 In the beginning of this paper, I proposed that the Nephite temple priests may have worn the priestly robes prescribed for use among the ancient Israelites. If so, it is conceivable that the “descendants of the priests of Noah” may have introduced this sacred clothing among members of the secret combinations because they wanted to make a claim for legitimate priestly power. Indeed, there is
evidence within the Book of Mormon itself that members of the secret combinations were blasphemous imitators of the holy order of God.67 And since the objectives of priestcraft and the secret combinations were one and the same (to get gain) it is proposed that this is the context in which the lambskin apparel of 3 Nephi 4:7 can best be understood. The following ideas should serve to illustrate this point.
Priestcraft:” get gain and praise of the world” (2 Nephi 26:29); “riches and honor” (Alma 1: 16)
Secret Combinations: “get gain” (Moses 5:31; Helaman 6: 17); “kingdoms and great glory” (Ether 8:9)One more correlation should be pointed out here. The apron was an emblem of power in several ancient cultures, but in Israel it could represent the power to speak rightfully in the name of God
(prophet), to administer legally his saving ordinances (priest), and to reign lawfully in his stead (king). The express purpose of those who joined the secret combinations was for them to obtain power (see Helaman 2:8; Ether 8: 14-19, 22-23; 11: 15). What could have been a more meaningful symbol for them than an emblem which for long ages past had represented the very thing for which they sought?
“In Mormon 1: 18-19 a connection is made between the secret combinations and thepractice of magic. In Moses 5:30-31 and 49 a connection is also made between secret combinations and the strange title Master Mahan. Anti-Mormon critics have long claimed that Master Mahan is a thinly veiled variation of Master Mason, which is the designation for the third degree of initiation within Freemasonry. They believe that the presence of this title in LDS scripture clearly demonstrates that Joseph Smith plagiarized Masonic material for his creative ventures. Footnote d for Moses 5:31, however, offers several possible meanings for Mahan based on its etymological root.70 Of the choices offered I personally feel that “destroyer” is the most probable one. My reasoning for this is that the Hebrew word maha means “destroy, “71 and the addition of an n would make the word a noun.72 Hence, maha(n) = destroy(er). Destruction is one of the attributes applied to Satan in the scriptures (see John 8:44; 1 Corinthians 5:5; Hebrews 2:14; 1 Peter 5:8), and he has been identified as the destroyer in latter-day revelation.73 In Moses 5:29-31 we read that it was after Cain had bound himself to Satan with a secret oath, accompanied by the threat of destruction if he revealed this action, that he obtained the title Mahan. It
would appear that he obtained this title because he had been taught how to become a destroyer himself. It is of interest to note that in certain ancient cultures Satan was known by the name Mahoun and those who swore their allegiance to him acquired that name for themselves.74
74 John Jamieson, An Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language,
rev. ed. (Paisley, Scotland: Gardner, 1879), 3:205; see also the various references in D. Michael Quinn, Early Mormonism and the Magic World View (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1987), 167 n. 4.
The symbolism ascribed by Masons to their white lambskin apron is that it represents innocence. But even this idea is not original to Freemasonry. Some Masonic researchers have come to he conclusion that the white apron’s meaning was derived directly from the white garment given to the ancient Christians when they were initiated into a state of innocence at baptism (see Revelation 3:5}.77 This concept goes much farther back among the Israelites. When the high priest entered the holy of holies on
the Day of Atonement, each element of his vesture consisted of unadorned white linen (see Leviticus 16:4). This clothing signified that on that sacred day the nation was reborn and became innocent before the Lord (see Revelation 19:8). The various symbols that decorate Masonic aprons are also not original to Freemasonry, but came about through a long process of assimilation and evolution.78 It should be noted that some
of the symbols found on Masonic aprons are identical to those found on Greek Orthodox liturgical aprons.79
79 The Greek Orthodox aprons were inherited from the Coptic monks.
Both were made of leather. For illustrations see Sherrard, Athos-The Holy
Mountain, 57, 123, 127, 129, 131; Norwich and Sitwell, Mount Athos, 28, 66,
69.
And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. (Genesis 3:12-13)
Because of their transgression, Adam and Eve were cast out of the Garden of Eden. “Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.” (Genesis 3:23) Adam and Eve did not have to work in the Garden of Eden in order to survive, for food was provided already. However, outside of the Garden of Eden, life would be very different. “Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field” (Genesis 3:18).
There was no condemnation of the aprons Adam and Eve wore while in the Garden of Eden, only a chastisement and grave consequences for eating of the forbidden fruit. In actuality, the Lord demonstrated his agreement with the covering of their nakedness. That agreement along with the result of now having to live in a different world, with harsh conditions as compared to life in the garden, the Lord gave them something BETTER to clothe themselves with. “Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.” (Genesis 3:21)
The objective of the aprons of fig leaves was to cover their nakedness, in modesty. It was the best Adam and Eve could come up with, given the circumstances. Had the Lord rejected this modesty, He would have taken the aprons and left Adam and Eve in their nakedness. The coat of skins was provided after the instruction of the Lord of what they would now have to endure. A coat of skins was much more practical and protective from the elements, thorns and thistles outside of the garden than were fig leaves. God did not reject, but gave them something better with which to live in their new conditions.
As I mentioned before, there is symbolism in everything about the temple, this includes the clothing worn there as well. Since your question concerns the apron, let’s discuss that from a Biblical perspective. Let’s examine the word “aprons” which Adam and Eve wore and the symbology behind it. The Hebrew word from which “aprons” was translated was:
chagowr {khag-ore’} or chagor {khag-ore’} and (feminine) chagowrah {khag-o-raw’} or chagorah {khag-o-raw’}
Hebrew: personal noun masculine
Possible Definitions:
1) girdle, belt
2) girdle, loin-covering, belt, loin-cloth, armour
(Strongs’ 2290, see also Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, 640a, 640c)
The “apron,” or “girdle” worn by Adam and Eve was most likely a loincloth type covering (much like you see Tarzan wearing) made from leaves. As a loincloth style garment, it served as a “shield” against immodesty.
In addition to being a symbol of modesty, the girdle is also a symbol of righteousness to the Lord. “And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.” (Isaiah 11:5) The Lord has even commanded some to wear an apron, or girdle.
THUS saith the LORD unto me, Go and get thee a linen girdle, and put it upon thy loins, and put it not in water. So I got a girdle according to the word of the LORD, and put it on my loins. (Jeremiah 13:1-2)
Evidently, even the Lord wears a girdle apron (or will in the future) as part of His holy garments.
Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. (Revelation 1:11-13)
This doesn’t sound like a rejection to me.
Besides being a symbol for modesty and righteousness for the Lord, there is yet another symbol for the girdle (apron). It has to do with Priesthood authority. The book of Exodus is very detailed about the dress of “holy garments” for those in authority, and the girdle was part of that.
…and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office. And they shall take gold, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen. And they shall make the ephod of gold, of blue, and of purple, of scarlet, and fine twined linen, with cunning work. It shall have the two shoulderpieces thereof joined at the two edges thereof; and so it shall be joined together. And the curious girdle of the ephod, which is upon it, shall be of the same, according to the work thereof; even of gold, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen. (Exodus 28:4-8)
The apron, or girdle, is a symbol of righteousness to the Lord, and of Priesthood authority. The Lord never condemned the wearing of fig leaf aprons. Rather, it is a Biblical symbol of Priesthood Authority, righteousness to the Lord, and the creation of man by God, not to mention the clear representation of the symbolism referring to modesty. I hope this answers your question.
scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1169&context=jbms
Understanding Symbols
One key to understanding a symbol is that it often resembles the thing it stands for. For example, the bread and water of the sacrament represent the body and blood of the Savior—in that order. It would make no sense to have bread represent the Savior’s blood or to have water represent the Savior’s body. Bread, like flesh, is solid; water, like blood, is liquid.
Another example is the decoration embroidered on the clothing of the high priest in the Old Testament: “They made upon the hems of the [high priest’s] robe pomegranates of blue, and purple, and scarlet” (Exodus 39:24). Have you ever eaten a pomegranate? If so, you know that it is full of seeds. So the pomegranate can be seen as a symbol of fertility, of posterity. In addition, the juice of the pomegranate is red, suggesting blood, or life: “The life of all flesh is the blood thereof” (Leviticus 17:14).
After Adam and Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, “they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons” (Genesis 3:7). What color are fig leaves? Green, which symbolizes life and growth. Figs also contain hundreds of tiny seeds, so the fig, like the pomegranate, can represent fertility and posterity. In addition, it was only after the Fall that Adam and Eve were able to have children. As Eve said, “Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed” (Moses 5:9–11) 5 Tips to Better Understand Temple Symbols
by Jack M. Lyon
Breechclout Fact Sheet
• Breechclout Fact 1: The Native Indian breechclouts were basic one-piece articles of clothing that covered the loins of the wearer
• Breechclout Fact 2: When made of cloth, the breechclout is referred to as a breechcloth or loincloth www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-clothing/breechclout.htm
• Red Color Symbolizes war, blood, strength, energy, power and success in war paint. Red clays containing oxides of iron, roots, berries, barks and beets. The Lachnanthes plant commonly known as redroot native to eastern North America Redroot and also used as red war paint. When the root is crushed it “bleeds” a reddish dye. Bloodroot plants are also used to produce red war paint. Red was predominately used for painting because of its availability. www.warpaths2peacepipes.com/native-american-culture/war-paint.htm
Mesoamericans Looking Hard for Sheep in Mesoamerica, try their Best to Substitute Sheep for Any Animal. See their Comments Below.
• There are 26 occurrences of the word “sheep” in the Book of Mormon. Of those, only Ether 9:18 refer to an actual animal being physically present in a Book of Mormon scene. The other uses of the word “sheep” are used metaphorically when referring to ministry or to Jesus Christ. See for example 1 Nephi 22:25; Mosiah 14:6–7; Alma 5:37–38; Helaman 15:13; 3 Nephi 15:17. The word “lamb” occurs 76 times in the Book of Mormon, and is most often used metaphorically as a title for Jesus Christ. See for example Nephi’s vision in 1 Nephi 11–14, which uses the titles “the Lamb” and “Lamb of God” 39 times; also 2 Nephi 31:4–6; 2 Nephi 33:14; Alma 7:14; Mormon 9:2–6. The idea of garments being washed white through the “blood of the Lamb” is found in Alma 13:11; Alma 34:36; Ether 13:10–11. Other references to lambs would have appeared on the Brass Plates, as they are quotations of Old Testament passages (2 Nephi 15:17 [cf. Isaiah 5:17]; 2 Nephi 21:6 [cf. Isaiah 11:6]; 2 Nephi 30:12 [cf. Isaiah 11:6]; Mosiah 14:7 [cf. Isaiah 53:7]. 3 Nephi 28:22 and 4 Nephi 1:33 both refer to a “suckling lamb,” not as a title for Jesus Christ, but still in a metaphorical sense to describe the experience of the Three Nephites in a den of beasts. The phrase “suckling lamb” may be an allusion to 1 Samuel 7:9, where the phrase also occurs.
• 5.For evidence of “sheep” in the New World, see Wade E. Miller, Science and the Book of Mormon: Cureloms, Cumoms, Horse and More (Laguna Niguel, CA: KCT & Associates, 2010), 43–48. Wade E. Miller and Matthew Roper, “Animals in the Book of Mormon: Challenges and Perspectives,” Interpreter Blog, April 21, 2014; For evidence of the remains of a young domestic sheep in western New York, see William A. Ritchie, The Archeology of New York State (Garden City, NY: Natural History Press, 1969), 242–243.
• 6.The presence of the word “lamb” in the Book of Mormon may be an example of loan-shifting. For a further treatment of loan-shifting and possible explanations for the presence of post-Columbian animals in the Book of Mormon, see Book of Mormon Central, “Why are Horses Mentioned in the Book of Mormon? (Enos 1:21)” KnoWhy 75 (April 11, 2016). While the Book of Mormon frequently mentions “flocks” and “herds”, these flocks are not identified as flocks of sheep. For a discussion on the nature of “flocks and herds” in the Book of Mormon, see Brant A. Gardner, Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 6 vols. (Salt Lake City, UT: Greg Kofford Books, 2007), 2:92–96. The most common example of this misconception is the story of Ammon at the waters of Sebus, guarding King Lamoni’s flocks of “sheep.” While the text never specifies what kind of animals Ammon was to protect, the flock’s susceptibility to scattering may strongly suggest that they were not sheep. See Gardner, Second Witness, 4:174–276.
Book of Mormon Central Source:
(Visited 11 times, 11 visits today)
Recent Comments