smac97 Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) 10 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Not mine personally either. I joined the Church in 1971. But they are part of our collective history. The further we are from that history the better I like it. I don't accept that line of reasoning. We are not collectively answerable for the misconduct of other Latter-day Saints. The Danites were condemned by Joseph Smith, and its founder was excommunicated from the Church and promptly became it enemy. To the extent Joseph Smith was aware of their existence, he encouraged them to be lawful. Thanks, -Smac Edited January 15, 2016 by smac97 2
CV75 Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 7 hours ago, amo said: Would any-1 happen to know if local civic leaders are told or briefed on what transpires inside the temples? How can they know for sure that what is done inside can be considered civically correct? Thx, amo It seems that civic leaders approving its operation would require whatever they needed to know up-front on applications, permits, interviews, etc. Violations would eventually be exposed through the normal course of community life.
theplains Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) 7 hours ago, bluebell said: Sounds like he means legal. I was told once that a copy of the temple ceremony is in one of the government libraries in Washington, D.C. because the government had to be sure what was happening in them was legal. As far as I know, the government does not recognize (make legal) anything that happens in the temple. Some of it can already be viewed online. Regards, Jim Edited January 15, 2016 by theplains addition
thesometimesaint Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 27 minutes ago, smac97 said: I don't accept that line of reasoning. We are not collectively answerable for the misconduct of other Latter-day Saints. The Danites were condemned by Joseph Smith, and its founder was excommunicated from the Church and promptly became it enemy. To the extent Joseph Smith was aware of their existence, he encouraged them to be lawful. Thanks, -Smac I don't like the Danites either. Unfortunately we have to take the good along with the bad. Otherwise we run into a No true Scotsman Argument. Of course we're not answerable for what anyone else does be it good or bad. But there are those that would/do make that argument.
consiglieri Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: It could be that I have been bestowed with special privileges on this board that facilitate my spying on you and others and informing your bishop of what you do here. Or it might be that I click on the heart icon in the lower right corner of the post, thereby bringing up a list of all the people who have given rep points to that post -- which, as far as I understand, anyone can do who is registered here. So, with this newfound skill, you can check one of your posts above and find that I have given even you a rep point. Cool! Thanks for the tip! And the rep point!
consiglieri Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: Consider the wording in context (tss provided the entire text to verse 2 in a post above). It's all about God providing deliverance "when dark clouds of trouble hang o'er us" and God smiting "the wicked who fight against Zion." There's nothing in there about the Danites doing it, if that's what you have in mind. So if you have a problem with a verse like this being in one of our hymns, you pretty much should have a problem with any church that earnestly believes in the Bible, since this is a reflection of Biblical doctrine. Flash the sword above the foe. Every stroke disarms a foeman.
consiglieri Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: Speak for yourself; they're not my Danites. Isn't that what Joseph Smith said?
thesometimesaint Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 9 minutes ago, theplains said: As far as I know, the government does not recognize (make legal) anything that happens in the temple. Regards, Jim The LDS Temples in the US have legal authority to conduct legally binding marriages, as do ministers of other religions.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 (edited) 50 minutes ago, consiglieri said: Flash the sword above the foe. Every stroke disarms a foeman. This LDS hymn, like many hymns from a Protestant tradition (Onward Christian Soldiers, for example) employs military imagery to symbolize the eternal struggle of truth vs. error, good vs. evil, etc. This is definitely not exclusively indigenous to Mormonism, and I would dare say it is rarely, if ever, taken literally to justify extralegal violence. Edited January 15, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
smac97 Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: I don't like the Danites either. Unfortunately we have to take the good along with the bad. Otherwise we run into a No true Scotsman Argument. I'm not sure about that. Taking "the good along with the bad" is the essential argument of the "All Jews are Christ-killers" line of reasoning. In any event, I'm not even sure what "take the good along with the bad" means. Quote Of course we're not answerable for what anyone else does be it good or bad. But there are those that would/do make that argument. And they are wrong to do so. I don't think all Muslims are responsible/answerable for 9/11, or that all Jews are responsible/answerable for the death of Jesus, or that all atheists are responsible/answerable for the atrocities of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, and so on. My brother is currently in prison for a very serious felony. My wife is a direct descendant of John D. Lee (of "Mountain Meadows Massacre" fame). I just read in the news that a former member of my ward, who was also a friend and neighbor, was just arrested on some very serious and disturbing charges. The neither I nor the collective Latter-day Saints are responsible/answerable for my brother's felony, or Lee's actions at Mountain Meadows, or my friend's apparent-but-not-yet-established misconduct. Thanks, -Smac 3
The Nehor Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 7 hours ago, amo said: You'r more than welcome to come in, we'll have a blast... Now, back to the question... amo I still think you are preaching an Orwellian government. Why would they assume something nefarious is going on in the temple in the first place and why would they have the right to snoop and find out if they did? I do not know of any duty political leaders have to sniff out the non-civically minded amongst us. Your question is loaded with presuppositions about some kind of police state. I think a more interesting question the your insane OP is why you asked it. 2
The Nehor Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 1 hour ago, consiglieri said: Flash the sword above the foe. Every stroke disarms a foeman. I was told that was about killing sin and not sinners. Made the song much less fun.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 43 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I still think you are preaching an Orwellian government. Why would they assume something nefarious is going on in the temple in the first place and why would they have the right to snoop and find out if they did? I do not know of any duty political leaders have to sniff out the non-civically minded amongst us. Your question is loaded with presuppositions about some kind of police state. I think a more interesting question the your insane OP is why you asked it. That any American citizen would even hint that such a thing is desirable I find disquieting. Which is why I wonder whether the poster is a resident of the United States.
The Nehor Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: That any American citizen would even hint that such a thing is desirable I find disquieting. Which is why I wonder whether the poster is a resident of the United States. More likely he is just not very bright and read about the old oath to pray for vengeance for Joseph and is attacking in a dumb way using "not civic minded" as an allegation and trying to maintain a facade of innocence by making it a question. Most anti-Mormons are boring and predictable. The statement that their minds would be darkened seems to apply to general intelligence and creativity and an overdeveloped belief that their bull in a china shop approach is as subtle as their master's plans. 1
strappinglad Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 Smells like a drive by to me , folks. The OP certainly provided some ' amo' for the discussion. 2
JAHS Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 I remember many years ago when they were starting to show the temple session in movie form in the Swiss temple, President Hinckley went in advance of the dedication so the equipment and films could be properly installed. When he arrived a customs agent informed him that his the films needed to be reviewed by the federal film board to make sure nothing bad was being brought into the country, He was forced to leave it with the agent over the weekend. After much fasting and praying to keep the films safe, and after another intense conversation with the customs agent, President Hinckley was able to get the films to the temple without anything being compromised.
webbles Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 6 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: The LDS Temples in the US have legal authority to conduct legally binding marriages, as do ministers of other religions. I don't think it has anything to do with the LDS Temples having legal authority. It is that ministers of religions have legal authority to perform marriages and there are no limits where the marriage may take place. 1
mfbukowski Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 3 hours ago, The Nehor said: More likely he is just not very bright and read about the old oath to pray for vengeance for Joseph and is attacking in a dumb way using "not civic minded" as an allegation and trying to maintain a facade of innocence by making it a question. Most anti-Mormons are boring and predictable. The statement that their minds would be darkened seems to apply to general intelligence and creativity and an overdeveloped belief that their bull in a china shop approach is as subtle as their master's plans. Dangya. I get ticked off at you and then you make me laugh. grrrrrr. Do you know how frustrating that is, not knowing if I like you or not?
mfbukowski Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 3 hours ago, strappinglad said: Smells like a drive by to me , folks. The OP certainly provided some ' amo' for the discussion. I thought about that handle. On one hand it is "I love" in Latin, which works with the ESL hypothesis, and then there is the "ammo" ambiguity. Odd how language works
The Nehor Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 4 hours ago, mfbukowski said: Dangya. I get ticked off at you and then you make me laugh. grrrrrr. Do you know how frustrating that is, not knowing if I like you or not? I have the same ambivalence about myself. 2
thesometimesaint Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 (edited) 20 hours ago, smac97 said: I'm not sure about that. Taking "the good along with the bad" is the essential argument of the "All Jews are Christ-killers" line of reasoning. In any event, I'm not even sure what "take the good along with the bad" means. And they are wrong to do so. I don't think all Muslims are responsible/answerable for 9/11, or that all Jews are responsible/answerable for the death of Jesus, or that all atheists are responsible/answerable for the atrocities of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, and so on. My brother is currently in prison for a very serious felony. My wife is a direct descendant of John D. Lee (of "Mountain Meadows Massacre" fame). I just read in the news that a former member of my ward, who was also a friend and neighbor, was just arrested on some very serious and disturbing charges. The neither I nor the collective Latter-day Saints are responsible/answerable for my brother's felony, or Lee's actions at Mountain Meadows, or my friend's apparent-but-not-yet-established misconduct. Thanks, -Smac Just as historical facts. My predecessors fought on both sides of the American Revolutionary War. Which one's weren't my predecessors? Of course they're not responsible. But it is historical incorrect to claim they weren't Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists, or what have you. The only one's responsible for MMM are the ones who took those actions. But to deny they were Mormon's is simply incorrect. Edited January 16, 2016 by thesometimesaint
smac97 Posted January 16, 2016 Posted January 16, 2016 2 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Just as historical facts. My predecessors fought on both sides of the American Revolutionary War. Which one's weren't my predecessors? Of course they're not responsible. But it is historical incorrect to claim they weren't Jews, Muslims, Christians, Atheists, or what have you. The only one's responsible for MMM are the ones who took those actions. But to deny they were Mormon's is simply incorrect. Fair enough. Thanks, -Smac
theplains Posted January 18, 2016 Posted January 18, 2016 On 15/01/2016 at 4:45 PM, thesometimesaint said: The LDS Temples in the US have legal authority to conduct legally binding marriages, as do ministers of other religions. I may be wrong, but I thought only sealings occur in temples. The actual marriage ceremony (where the legal documents are validated) is done outside the temple. Regards, Jim
Calm Posted January 18, 2016 Posted January 18, 2016 Just now, theplains said: I may be wrong, but I thought only sealings occur in temples. The actual marriage ceremony (where the legal documents are validated) is done outside the temple. Regards, Jim You are wrong.
theplains Posted January 18, 2016 Posted January 18, 2016 7 minutes ago, Calm said: You are wrong. Thank you for the correction. Jim
Recommended Posts