Confirmed: Another New Temple Film

[Garden Girl]

Oh, so this is like a legitimate one, not one of those ones made with hidden camera, so haram.

 

Yes Ellen... part of the Endowment session is a film, beautifully done, depicting the creation, Garden, and expulsion of Adam and Eve events as described in scripture.  The events regarding Satan in the Garden are also depicted... the actors portraying the various roles do quite a good job.

 

GG

[djones]

And maybe Peter will have hair in the new one too. LOL. I guess I always assumed that balding would just be an earthly problem. Apparently they have that problem in the pre-existence too. Bwahaha.

[BlueDreams]

I went and saw it last night when an appointment canceled. (Ah the joys of living 5 min away from a temple). Yes, Peter's got hair .

 

Personally I prefer the first one. 

 

What I really like about this one (that I can think of, off hand):

- The beginning seemed to go faster even though I knew it didn't.

- I liked the creation part fairly equally.

- They made the part where Satan's talking with Eve seem more elongated, with different scenes, giving this impression that they were really hashing this out. I liked that, because it gave new understanding to Eve's promise to God later.

- John is obviously a brown person of some sort. I'm glad someone, anyone, was brown.   

- Adam and eve were shown really working side by side after the fall, which I liked as well.

 

What I don't like:

- The Garden of Eden is too dark. And who ever directed seemed to have a love of water reflections. 

- After the last satan, this satan took some getting used to. He comes off as trying to be Adam's bro and Laughs.....a lot. He's a whole lot more louder and shows far more anger.  

- Some of the change of scenes were too rapid and occurred too often. 

- Eve was less dynamic (didn't like), but I feel they still did try to have her be more prominent (did like)

 

With luv,

BD

[Deborah]

I prefer the first one as well as I feel with the music and everything it is more emotional. It is interesting to have a variety in any case and different interpretations. Amazing how the exact same words can be presented so differently.

[MorningStar]

Hate to be the one...but it took years for my tailbone to get where I could sit longer than 15 without pain after it likely got broken in childbirth. Still can't sit on it a certain way and horseback riding has never been comfortable since.?..and he's pat his 30th birthday.

Good luck.

I think my first son broke it when he was born, but he was in the NICU for his first week of life and I didn't have a chance to see anyone.  By the time we got home, I was done with doctors and they said there was nothing that could be done anyway.  It eventually got mostly better, but I couldn't sit on the floor anymore.  Last year I had many hours at the piano bench and it became worse than ever, even hurting in bed, waking me up at night, etc.  At least that has improved.  I was just "partially released" from Primary, so now I play for the first hour and get a break during the second.  That's a start.  I have a cushion, but it doesn't seem to help at all.  I'll have to try a different kind.

[Calm]

I find a gel cushion to be the best, they have some cushions that are horseshoe for use for massage for the head (chin goes where the hole is as well as specialised for the tailbone.  Takes some looking, but well worth it.

 

Something like this:

 

http://www.google.com/search?q=broken+tailbone+pillow&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&source=iu&imgil=veLA4e1JZiz3ZM%253A%253Bhttp%253A%252F%252Ft0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9GcRUQAEDoLqZJq4HQDXM5PIaEfpSg5OtIFkhpsGgUt0He9eU8LXiRQ%253B594%253B373%253BpFXqPOtHmPs81M%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.tushcush.com%25252F&sa=X&ei=OMHZUq2-K4HboAS8mIGgAQ&ved=0CFEQ9QEwAg#facrc=_&imgrc=veLA4e1JZiz3ZM%253A%3BpFXqPOtHmPs81M%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.tushcush.com%252Fassets%252Fimages%252Fhomepage_hl.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.tushcush.com%252F%3B594%3B373

 

My mil gave me a donut that was inflated so I would inflate it part way and then use it to shift my weight off that area.  Helped a lot, but I had to be aware of it all the time.

Edited January 17, 2014 by calmoriah

[mfbukowski]

I haven't seen the 2013 one yet because my tailbone has been hurting bad for over a year.    Last time I went, I wanted to scream every time I stood up or sat down.  I just need to go and ask if I can be the weirdo who stands in the back of the room.  I can't even handle a 90 minute move at the theater.  Or sitting in this computer chair.  Back to my standing activities! 

Not a problem at all.  Go tomorrow and stand.  It is not a problem for anyone at all.

[Calm]

Not tomorrow. It is probably closed...next day.

[MorningStar]

Not a problem at all.  Go tomorrow and stand.  It is not a problem for anyone at all.

Good to know.  Thank you!  I was so upset when I discovered I couldn't even handle those chairs. My three hour flight months ago was torture!  By the end of the flight, I was pushing on the armrests to lift myself off of the seat.  I have no idea how I'm ever going to drive to Utah again since that takes us at least 16 hours.  Thanks for the link, Cal!  I'm going to try lots of cushions and see what works.  I tried one in a movie theater when we saw Frozen, but still ended up miserable.

[mfbukowski]

Good to know.  Thank you!  I was so upset when I discovered I couldn't even handle those chairs. My three hour flight months ago was torture!  By the end of the flight, I was pushing on the armrests to lift myself off of the seat.  I have no idea how I'm ever going to drive to Utah again since that takes us at least 16 hours.  Thanks for the link, Cal!  I'm going to try lots of cushions and see what works.  I tried one in a movie theater when we saw Frozen, but still ended up miserable.

At the LA temple we had a dear sister who used to attend fairly regularly on a hospital gurney!

 

Special accommodations were made at the veil, but she was wheeled from room to room, pretty much as would a person in a wheelchair.

 

Ordinance workers are trained in doing whatever it takes to allow a person to experience the endowment- just tell them your needs and they will work it out!

[mfbukowski]

Not tomorrow. It is probably closed...next day.

Dang- I thought I was doing well in thinking that through because it was Sunday. 

[Garden Girl]

 

Ordinance workers are trained in doing whatever it takes to allow a person to experience the endowment- just tell them your needs and they will work it out!

 This is true... as most of you know from my mentioning it here, I served as an ordinance worker for almost six years... every Friday... and before we started our assignments we had a "prayer meeting" where we (men and women) would gather to have a hymn, a prayer, and a brief talk... then the men would leave and go to a separate room and we each would receive training pertaining to our ordinances.  Part of this training included being prepared to meet any situation, be it regarding patrons, or emergencies.  It was wonderful training and made it easier for us to serve with confidence because we were constantly being reminded that the patron's enjoyment, personal experience and understanding of the ordinances were paramount.  There is always a sister or a brother worker to assist a patron and help them feel comfortable...

 

GG

[Tacenda]

This is true... as most of you know from my mentioning it here, I served as an ordinance worker for almost six years... every Friday... and before we started our assignments we had a "prayer meeting" where we (men and women) would gather to have a hymn, a prayer, and a brief talk... then the men would leave and go to a separate room and we each would receive training pertaining to our ordinances. Part of this training included being prepared to meet any situation, be it regarding patrons, or emergencies. It was wonderful training and made it easier for us to serve with confidence because we were constantly being reminded that the patron's enjoyment, personal experience and understanding of the ordinances were paramount. There is always a sister or a brother worker to assist a patron and help them feel comfortable...

GG

I've witnessed a few occasions where a sister ordinance worker jumped in to resolve a problem. I will miss them. I was always slow at the veil and there was never a time they were impatient or annoyed with me, very loving.

[Grudunza]

I went the other day for the first time since last July. I feel a little uncomfortable discussing anything specific about it, but correct me if I'm wrong that there were some dialogue changes, just a few, especially in the earlier part. I was under the impression that there had been no actual changes, other than the actors and direction and such, but I could swear there were.

[BlueDreams]

I went the other day for the first time since last July. I feel a little uncomfortable discussing anything specific about it, but correct me if I'm wrong that there were some dialogue changes, just a few, especially in the earlier part. I was under the impression that there had been no actual changes, other than the actors and direction and such, but I could swear there were.

 

No it's the same. The changes in acting and emphasis gives it the sense that something has altered...but it hasn't.

 

With luv,

BD 

[fatherofone]

I went to the temple and saw this yesterday, it is by far the best one I believe I have ever been to.  I laughed a couple of times, celebrated with adam and eve when they heard about the savior, it was great.

[Trencher7]

Overall I really like the new film.  Michael Ballam's overly dramatic acting was always annoying.  I'm sure the real Devil is far more likable.  Having said that what still don't quite understand is why we are subject to Satan addressing us as an audience in any way.  Are we to take him as a credible source of truth and believe him?  If not why use him to communicate truth to us instead of God? 

[Tacenda]

Overall I really like the new film.  Michael Ballam's overly dramatic acting was always annoying.  I'm sure the real Devil is far more likable.  Having said that what still don't quite understand is why we are subject to Satan addressing us as an audience in any way.  Are we to take him as a credible source of truth and believe him?  If not why use him to communicate truth to us instead of God? 

This has always bothered me, to the extent that it caused me to question if the temple is the correct path.  Jesus said our body was the temple and when he came we didn't need a temple for animal sacrifice, He tore down the heavy, heavy veil, in half.  Which suggests we don't have the temple for works.  Why then do we still have them?  I don't like that we listen to the devil, isn't he supposed to be a conniver?  It's the strangest thing.  He has way too much say, I'd like to see more of the Saviour and what He has to say.  The amount spent on temples, go a long way.  I understand the temple is believed to be a service for the dead.  And even the attender, but it doesn't take care of the expedient work, the work that the Lord has prescribed to be done on the earth. I wish the temple could have at least had a cameo of the Saviour somewhere.  That is.. if I still fully believed.    

[Trencher7]

 

 

The savior is in the movie of course so I'm not sure why you would be hoping for a cameo.  I'm not going into detail, but I just find Satan's behavior odd pertaining to a threat he gives us.  Do we believe him?  Why?  Why would he threaten us when the actual Devil would most likely try and convince us our behavior didn't really matter and just to take it easy?  It's as if he's telling us, "Hey you better be good, or else!"  Is that at all realistic?

 

Please let's not discuss specifics of the film.

[Tacenda]

Trencher7, without discussing specifics, apparently it skipped my mind. But the last I've been to the temple, was over a year ago.

[Kenngo1969]

Overall I really like the new film.  Michael Ballam's overly dramatic acting was always annoying.  I'm sure the real Devil is far more likable.  Having said that what still don't quite understand is why we are subject to Satan addressing us as an audience in any way.  Are we to take him as a credible source of truth and believe him?  If not why use him to communicate truth to us instead of God? 

If you're truly in a situation in which you never have to tell the Adversary, "Get thee behind me, Satan," I congratulate you.  I dare say, however, that you're much more the exception than the rule (even among the best, most faithful, most in-tune of us).  Accepting your characterization of the Endowment as accurate for the sake of this discussion, if I'm going to learn how to deal with Satan and his tactics anywhere, I would prefer to do so in the Temple.  If I may ask you some rhetorical questions, do you believe the old adage that the Adversary will, if necessary, tell us a thousand truths simply to be able to sneak in a single lie?  Doesn't your objection illustrate, essentially, how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is "danged if it does, and danged if it doesn't"?  If we're going to triumph in going against him, doesn't that necessitate knowing at least something about how the Adversary operates? Yet, if the Church of Jesus Christ isn't forthright in demonstrating how the Adversary operates, doesn't that potentially give disaffected members of the Church reason to say, "I should have known better how to deal with the Adversary's tactics, but I was ignorant because the Church didn't prepare me"?

 

Good news: however well the Adversary plays the game in the short run, God wins in the long run! (I confess: I skipped to the end of the Scriptures to find that out. ) We simply must decide whether we're interested more in short-term, temporary, largely-illusory victories or in longer-term, permanent, genuine ones.  A big part of the Endowment's purpose is to encourage us to ponder that question and to choose the second option.  It could not accomplish that purpose if it encouraged us to deny the Adversary's existence or to diminish his potential to influence us.  (In fact, the Scriptures teach us that a big part of the Adversary's modus operandi is to try to convince us either (a) that he doesn't exist [see 2 Nephi 28:22]; or (b) that it's not that big of a deal if we allow ourselves to be influenced by him [see 2 Nephi 28:8]).  Another thing the Endowment teaches us is that if he didn't exist, we would lack both the opportunity to make genuine choices and the opportunity to experience real growth.  But it also teaches us that we can triumph over him, and how to do that ("He shall have power to bruise thy heel, but thou shalt have power to crush his head").

Edited January 27, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Trencher7]

Kenngo,  I believe the very brief portion I am speaking of in the film may not have been clear,  but I can't get more detailed.  My 2nd post should shed more light on what I am talking about.  Of course there's no problem with having the adversary portrayed in the film for us to learn his tactics.  I have no problem at all with that.   I don't disagree with really anything you wrote. 

 (In fact, the Scriptures teach us that a big part of the Adversary's modus operandi is to try to convince us either (a) that he doesn't exist [see 2 Nephi 28:22]; or (b) that it's not that big of a deal if we allow ourselves to be influenced by him [see 2 Nephi 28:8]).  

 

Exactly.  Which is why I was surprised at the film showing us exactly the opposite.

[Grudunza]

I believe I know the part you're referring to (where he breaks the 4th wall). Yeah, that feels a little strange, but what he says there is consistent with what he has been saying prior to that, so I don't see it as an issue of his credibility. He is indeed credible about what he is saying there, so we should heed that warning.

[Kenngo1969]

... Exactly.  Which is why I was surprised at the film showing us exactly the opposite.

Well, it is a drama, and while drama generally is intended to teach us real-life lessons and/or otherwise somehow to reflect real life, there's a difference between saying that and saying that drama is life.  I'm "behind the eight-ball," because I'm in a Temple District in which the Endowment is presented live, so I'm afraid I'll have to defer to others who have experienced the film(s) to address your contention that the film(s) don't adequately depict Satan's true tactics.  Sorry!

 

I wish you well.

 

P.S.: I know which portion you're referring to, and while my previous post only addressed two of his tactics ((1) "I don't exist"; and (2) "If I do exist, I'm not that bad") that's not to say that those are the only tricks in his bag: he's not above using threats such as the one he issues when he "breaks the fourth wall" in the presentation.  Reread Moses 1.  Although the record doesn't specifically state that Satan threatened Moses, I believe that's the clear implication to be drawn from the fact that Satan "cried with a loud voice" and "ranted upon the earth." 

Edited January 28, 2014 by Kenngo1969