I just wanted to add something to that which my brother wrote about the so called blood oaths. Let us take a logical look at this claim of blood oaths. A blood oath is one in which a group of people promise something with the expectation that should one member of the group break the oath, then the rest will seek to kill the oath breaker. So, I would ask you to consider the following. Where is the trail of bodies of those that broke their temple oaths? There have been quite a few people who have claimed to reveal the secrets of our temple ceremonies. How many of them have been murdered? None that I know of. So, logically. this leads me to one of two conclusions. Either the people revealing these secrets are lying about the "blood oaths" or they are lying about the secrets that they are alleging to reveal. If the first instance is true, then the blood oaths aren't as they say they are. No one is trying to kill them because the blood oaths don't exist. If the second instance is true, then they are not telling the truth about the temple ceremonies. So, no one is trying to kill them because they are not actually revealing the sacred things of the temple. Either way, the ex-members who talk about blood oaths are lying to you about what goes on in our temples. Of course, there is a third possibility. They are lying all around about what goes on in our temples. I went through the temple to receive my own endowment in 1986. This was well before the "blood oaths" were allegedly removed. There were no blood oaths in the ceremony at that time. They did not exist. ********************* "science_geek: So, you are lying again and spreading false doctrine. I think you need to discuss your activities here with your bishop. You are lying about LDS doctrine. Why can't you just admit the truth?" Notice that Science_geek can't argue the logic of my post. So, he just resorts to character assassination. So, science-geek, are you living in fear of us coming after you? Have you any evidence that we are out there trying to kill you for breaking temple covenants? Can you provide any evidence of people being murdered for breaking their temple covenants? I didn't think so. ********************* I just wanted to point out the paranoia exhibited in science_geek's comment. He cites no concrete evidence of the Church attacking people for breaking their temple covenants other than his word. Personally, I don't find that very compelling. So, I will just end this dialogue by stating that there are no blood oaths in the temple ceremonies that I have experienced. At no point in the ceremonies was there ever a threat of physical retribution for breaking the covenants. Any one who says otherwise has either never been through the ceremonies or did not understand them if they have been. The latter apparently applies to science_geek. ********************* "science_geek: I guess you must be splitting hairs, as usual, Glenn. The Blood Oath was a part of the earlier Endowment ritual. It is, technically, no longer a Blood Oath as blood is no longer drawn during the ritual." By what authority do you claim that the ceremony ever involved bloodletting. I checked with my parents on this one. They have been going to the temple for over 50 years. They have no knowledge of the ceremonies ever having involved such a practice. I have no reason to doubt them. So, I suspect that your sources are lying to you.

Actusally the correct answer is NO. It would surely scare them away.

new members are told "of" the temple ceremony, they are not told details.

I'll answer based off the old six discussions. Investigators were told about baptisms for the dead, and being sealed. I can't remember if the endowment ceremony was mentioned.