Damien the Leper Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Except I don't. I see articles by apostates and revisionists who demand that we reject the Book of Mormon and then try to throw us a sop to the effect that it might still be good for something anyway.I don't agree. I don't wish to get into discussing personalities, but I don't know of anyone who thinks Dan Vogel, for example, is a believing Latter-day Saint.A notorious and utterly discredited canard.Regards,PahoranFascinating response.No one is pressuring anyone to believe the Book of Mormon in a non traditional view. People are presenting their own ideas and publishing about them. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Do we live in America? I'm pretty sure censorship does not apply to this.What people you KNOW think of Vogel is of little relevence. He has never seemed 'apostate' as you suggest.I like B.H. Roberts and his work on our History of the Church volumes. Not bad for a notorious and utterly discredited canard who is still quoted quite often in church.
Pahoran Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Fascinating response.No one is pressuring anyone to believe the Book of Mormon in a non traditional view. People are presenting their own ideas and publishing about them. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Do we live in America? I'm pretty sure censorship does not apply to this.Nobody said that there was; but honesty is not censorship.Sunstone and Signature Books aren't in the business of publishing orthodox or mainstream LDS thoughts. They publish, at best, marginal fringe views, and at worst, outright apostate and anti-Mormon views. It is only honest to admit this fact. It is egregiously dishonest to try to pretend that their offerings represent the views of "believing Latter-day Saints."Please note that I don't point this out in order to scare anyone off reading Metcalfe's tome; I merely say this to refute the falsehood with which it was introduced. I repeat: whatever its strengths or weaknesses, whatever it says or does not say, whatever it gets right or wrong, it does so entirely from a non-believing perspective.What people you KNOW think of Vogel is of little relevence. He has never seemed 'apostate' as you suggest.Mr Vogel posts on this forum occasionally. He has never seemed anything remotely like an LDS believer to me.I like B.H. Roberts and his work on our History of the Church volumes. Not bad for a notorious and utterly discredited canard who is still quoted quite often in church.Assignment no. 1: Look up the word "canard."B. H. Roberts was in no sense a "canard;" he was a person. A person who, BTW, explicitly said that his 1922 "study" was an attempt to anticipate possible future lines of attack against the Book of Mormon. The notion that the impeccably faithful B. H. Roberts was "within that camp," i.e. the camp of the apostate revisionists who want to throw the Book of Mormon out as an ancient scripture, but reintroduce it as a modern fable of some kind, is the "notorious and utterly discredited canard" mentioned.A few years ago, an attempt was made, by loudly publicising portions of his "study" while at the same time suppressing the accompanying letter that explained what it was really about, to pretend that Roberts had abandoned faith in the Book of Mormon as scripture. That attempt was a failure. It is a notorious and utterly discredited canard.Just so you know.Regards,Pahoran
mfbukowski Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) I finally had a chance to get by the LA temple while I had a camera with me, and I will just post these, if I can. The photos are poor- bad camera, at night, poor photographer etc, but I think you will get the idea.The only door on the East side of the LA Temple is a fairly small service door- next to - as you can see- a garage door for deliveries.Crosses? I will let you draw your own conclusions!The LA temple was dedicated by President McKay in 1956 and carries many of the same ornamental motifs as others of this era. Edited February 10, 2012 by mfbukowski
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Crosses? I will let you draw your own conclusions!Thanks for posting these. They certainly look like crosses to me. So you've seen only one door like this on the temple?The LA temple was dedicated by President McKay in 1956 and carries many of the same ornamental motifs as others of this era.What timing! The temple was dedicated the year before the taboo was institutionalized. The construction began five years before that (1951). Church authorities approved the design in the winter of 1950 when George Albert Smith was President of the Church. President Smith died a few months later (in the spring of 1951), delaying the ground breaking ceremony to September 22, 1951.
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Check out the stain glass in the Porowan Utah 3rd Ward building (built in 1914). Edited February 10, 2012 by Mike Reed
Calm Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Reminds me of FLW's Tree of Life windows:http://free-stainedg...treeoflife.htmlremoved second image because Mike's got his to work. Edited February 10, 2012 by calmoriah
Calm Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) In fact, now that I look very closely at both, I would say the Parowan is combination cross/tree of life version (since it includes the diagonal 'branches' internally as well as the overall cross shape.add-on: Wright's Tree of Life window design was made in 1904/5 for the Martin House (http://www.jlsloan.com/flw.htm). Apparently he didn't give the name to the design so I don't know if he saw it in a symbolic way or it was simply an artistic motif. Since Wright had been making other similar windows, the Parowan artist might have been influenced by that particular style for tones and proportions even if the symbolism was not borrowed. I would be interested to know if it was coincidence or influence. Edited February 10, 2012 by calmoriah
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) And this stain glass from the Salt Lake Liberty Ward (1908-1924). Edited February 10, 2012 by Mike Reed
Calm Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Mike, the angle of the window makes it hard to tell, are the only crosses the ones in the lower shield?
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Stained Glass of the Whittier Ward, Salt Lake City (1938). Edited February 10, 2012 by Mike Reed
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) Mike, the angle of the window makes it hard to tell, are the only crosses the ones in the lower shield?Yep. You can access a magnefiable high res image here. Without a doubt, these are crosses: Edited February 10, 2012 by Mike Reed
Calm Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Yep. You can see a high res magnified image here. Without a doubt, these are crosses:Had no doubt they were crosses....I study heraldry for fun from time to time. Have a couple of books on my shelf and these definitely echo examples there. Just wondering if there were any more subtle ones as well. Will check out the other image, thank you.
mfbukowski Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Thanks for posting these. They certainly look like crosses to me. So you've seen only one door like this on the temple?Yes I would say they are definitely crosses. I have looked for others but have not seen any- though there is a grid on the North side which might have a similar grid structure with decorated intersections- I can't remember. But I will check- I get over there fairly often.What timing! The temple was dedicated the year before the taboo was institutionalized. The construction began five years before that (1951). Church authorities approved the design in the winter of 1950 when George Albert Smith was President of the Church. President Smith died a few months later (in the spring of 1951), delaying the ground breaking ceremony to September 22, 1951.Yes, I had noticed that myself- I thought you'd like that!
mfbukowski Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 In fact, now that I look very closely at both, I would say the Parowan is combination cross/tree of life version (since it includes the diagonal 'branches' internally as well as the overall cross shape.I often look at symmetrical diagonals as a "compass" motif as well. So arguably here you have compass, square, cross, and tree of life all in one design. Not too bad!
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Had no doubt they were crosses....Sorry... I didn't mean to sound blunt when I wrote that. I study heraldry for fun from time to time. Have a couple of books on my shelf and these definitely echo examples there.I would say that the crosses these shields are depicted more overtly than the average heraldry cross, since the corners are rounded. What do you think?Just wondering if there were any more subtle ones as well. Will check out the other image, thank you.Gotcha. You are welcome.
Calm Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 I would say that the crosses these shields are depicted more overtly than the average heraldry cross, since the corners are rounded. What do you think?If I remember tomorrow, I'll go look at my books to refresh my memory and make comparisons and tell you then. At the moment they simply look more stylized, possibly to fit the medium of stained glass.
Mike Reed Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 (edited) If I remember tomorrow, I'll go look at my books to refresh my memory and make comparisons and tell you then. I appreciate you looking into this.At the moment they simply look more stylized, possibly to fit the medium of stained glass.That's a good point about considering the medium. I should have looked more closely. The rounding of the corners may have been necessary to fit the medium, but it is hard to imagine that tapering the middle and widening the ends (of the cross arms) would have been needed. Instead, I imagine that it would be more difficult to make crosses this way, than to make the crosses with straight edges. If true, then this would indicate the artist's intent: to make the crosses stand out. Edited February 11, 2012 by Mike Reed
mfbukowski Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Don't know if you have ever cut glass before but I did it for a while for a living. First you have to score the glass and then delicately break it along the scoring.Curves are very hard because both stages are difficult- you have to press on a diamond wheel or stylus to make the initial scratch- firm pressure around a bend is not easy. And then what is harder- you have to break the glass along the line you scored by gently bending the glass and hoping it breaks the right way. It's fairly easy to make the break if it is straight- there are special pliers to help with that, but when trying to make a curved shape, the break wants to go straight instead of going around the curve you have made. You really have to be highly skilled to do anything like these windows.The tree of life designs mentioned earlier would be much easier to do than these shapes with curves in them
Calm Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 I forgot today! Urgghh...will try to remember tomorrow.
Mike Reed Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 I forgot today! Urgghh...will try to remember tomorrow.That's it. I'm reporting you to the moderators. No rush. Thanks though.
Mike Reed Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) Don't know if you have ever cut glass before but I did it for a while for a living. First you have to score the glass and then delicately break it along the scoring.Curves are very hard because both stages are difficult- you have to press on a diamond wheel or stylus to make the initial scratch- firm pressure around a bend is not easy. And then what is harder- you have to break the glass along the line you scored by gently bending the glass and hoping it breaks the right way. It's fairly easy to make the break if it is straight- there are special pliers to help with that, but when trying to make a curved shape, the break wants to go straight instead of going around the curve you have made. You really have to be highly skilled to do anything like these windows.The tree of life designs mentioned earlier would be much easier to do than these shapes with curves in themI haven't cut glass, but I've watched others do it. I also assume it would be extra difficult to make these these stylized crosses (having curved edges) match one another. Edited February 11, 2012 by Mike Reed
mfbukowski Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) I haven't cut glass, but I've watched others do it. I also assume it would be extra difficult to make these these stylized crosses (having curved edges) match one another.Sorry, it can't be done. Seriously- very difficult. Lotsa broken glass I am sure to get a few that match. At least that is the way it would be if I tried it! But one good thing is that the lead covers a lot of chipped edges.One would have to have a pattern in thin wood or something like that to hold the stylus against to trace the patternOn the other hand, there are other techniques like actually painting on the glass for fine details- you can see that in the bundled wheat sheaves and beehive on the upper part of those windows Edited February 11, 2012 by mfbukowski
rodheadlee Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) Well if you put that Southern Cross in your port spreader, you are well on your way from Mazatlan, Mexico to Tahiti Edited February 11, 2012 by rodheadlee
mfbukowski Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 Well if you put that Southern Cross in your port spreader, you are wll on your way from Mazatlan, Mexico to TahitiYou can see it in Mazatlan?
rodheadlee Posted February 11, 2012 Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) You can see it in Mazatlan?Yes, actually in March you can see it from Turtle Bay (about half way up the coast of Baja.) Edited February 11, 2012 by rodheadlee
Recommended Posts