Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 32 minutes ago, Zakuska said: Children who are being sealed enter the temple all the time without baptism. Oddly enough, I knew that already. That's because those children are under eight, and therefore innocent. They're not adults. 32 minutes ago, Zakuska said: Even Satan himself is in the temple. He presented himself in God's temple in Job. Which is relevant -- how, exactly? 2
Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 30 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I wonder if there's indeed something sacrosanct about walking down the aisle. At non-LDS weddings I've attended, this and other traditional trappings have pretty much been used or dispensed with at will (many people, it seems, even custom-compose their own wedding vows these days). If, in practice, the traditions are that non-essential, I wonder what is so offensive about pointing out that fact. I've noticed a correlation between the decrease in the religious content of wedding ceremonies, and an increase in the visible ostentation thereof. IOW, the less religion in the wedding, the more show has to be put on. It's almost as if the secularizers are trying to compensate for the lack of something. 2
cinepro Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 15 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said: I've noticed a correlation between the decrease in the religious content of wedding ceremonies, and an increase in the visible ostentation thereof. IOW, the less religion in the wedding, the more show has to be put on. It's almost as if the secularizers are trying to compensate for the lack of something. That's a pretty serious projection. Do you attend a lot of weddings for couples of varying religiousness, or are you basing this off TV shows and movies? 1
Scott Lloyd Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) 16 minutes ago, cinepro said: That's a pretty serious projection. Do you attend a lot of weddings for couples of varying religiousness, or are you basing this off TV shows and movies? That (the part in bold) is a pretty serious projection. How do you know his comments are not indeed from personal, irl observation? Edited January 21, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 1
Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 1 minute ago, cinepro said: That's a pretty serious projection. Do you attend a lot of weddings for couples of varying religiousness, or are you basing this off TV shows and movies? I don't see how the word "projection" applies. I also don't claim to be providing a rigorously sourced "scientific" study of anything. I'm merely reporting my own observation, which comes from various sources.
salgare Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 (edited) 6 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: This is one more place you run into trouble. Jesus organized a religion while he was on earth. SEE https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+4%3A11-16&version=KJV Hey sometimesaint, good thoughts but this is were you really run into trouble. AoF 8. We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. Thus the BoM out weighs the Bible right? Now tell me when "a church" was organized in the BoM, and explain basically why it was even allowed at that time. Hyrum Andrus used to emphasis this fact, where the Holy Order (Patriarchal Order) is where it started and where it will end. As he would say, the Church is a temporary scaffolding (outer ordinances and priesthoods) helping build those at the Aaronic levels of "cry nothing but repentance to the people" and provide them Aaronic level ordinances and lead them to the inner ordinances and priesthoods. There will be NO Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Jew Jerusalem. Only the General Assembly and Church of the First Born. Where its a general assembly of Kings and Priests, Queens and Priestesses in the Holy Order. That's the doctrine I was taught and believed. Have all these things been lost? Edited January 22, 2016 by salgare
cinepro Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 7 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: I don't see how the word "projection" applies. I also don't claim to be providing a rigorously sourced "scientific" study of anything. I'm merely reporting my own observation, which comes from various sources. What are your sources though? This site estimates 2.3 million couples get married each year in the US. You're making a general comment about there being a correlation between the "religious content" of wedding ceremonies and the "visible ostentation." What is the data on this? I worked as a wedding DJ for 10 years, so I got to be involved with the planning and celebration of over 100 weddings, both LDS and non-LDS. Based on my experience (an admittedly small group), my theory is that "visible ostentation" is more closely correlated with the culture and wealth of the couple, independent of any religious component. What data do you have the supports your theory and discredits mine? 2
Teancum Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 12 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: I've noticed a correlation between the decrease in the religious content of wedding ceremonies, and an increase in the visible ostentation thereof. IOW, the less religion in the wedding, the more show has to be put on. It's almost as if the secularizers are trying to compensate for the lack of something. I disagree. I have been to many non LDS religious weddings that are quite elaborate and followed by very high end and expensive receptions. Maybe it is different where I live as compared to where you live.
filovirus Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 11 hours ago, cinepro said: I worked as a wedding DJ for 10 years, so I got to be involved with the planning and celebration of over 100 weddings, both LDS and non-LDS. Based on my experience (an admittedly small group), my theory is that "visible ostentation" is more closely correlated with the culture and wealth of the couple, independent of any religious component. What data do you have the supports your theory and discredits mine? I find it hard to believe a working DJ is allowed inside the temple for the ceremony. A reception, yes. And the fact that only a set number of people can attend the sealing ceremony due to space issues, that portion being overly grandiose and ornate is out of the question. Indeed, the pomp and circumstance usually comes later.
Traela Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 I wish we could get rid of the word "worthy" to describe those able to witness a sealing. "Prepared" might be better. Consider the requirements for attending: They hold a current recommend- which means They have received their endowment- which means They are at least 18 years old, have been a baptized member for at least year, if they are male they hold the Melchezidek priesthood, and usually if they are younger than about 25 either have been called on a mission or are getting/have gotten married. Only that top requirement involves current worthiness. 1
cinepro Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 2 hours ago, filovirus said: I find it hard to believe a working DJ is allowed inside the temple for the ceremony. A reception, yes. And the fact that only a set number of people can attend the sealing ceremony due to space issues, that portion being overly grandiose and ornate is out of the question. Indeed, the pomp and circumstance usually comes later. I don't think you're following the discussion.
filovirus Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, cinepro said: I don't think you're following the discussion. Just commenting that you stated "visible ostentation" has to do with culture and wealth. That may be true for the celebration aspect of a wedding. But for the actual sealing ceremony in Mormon culture, the opposite is true. It is both humble and private. Wealth does not play any part in it.
busybee Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 On 20/01/2016 at 11:55 PM, Scott Lloyd said: I don't know your mother's circumstances. But as a point of general clarification, I'm fairly certain that having to work on Sundays is not ordinarily grounds for automatic denial of a temple recommend. I'm quite confident that there are allowances made for extenuating circumstances and that normally, one who is obliged by employment circumstances to work on Sundays can still be eligible for a recommend. Those on this board who are or have been in bishoprics can correct me if I'm wrong. Smac, I do believe you are in that category. As a nurse I had to work on Sundays most of the time. It never prevented me from holding a recommend.
cinepro Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 2 hours ago, filovirus said: Just commenting that you stated "visible ostentation" has to do with culture and wealth. That may be true for the celebration aspect of a wedding. But for the actual sealing ceremony in Mormon culture, the opposite is true. It is both humble and private. Wealth does not play any part in it. We're not talking about sealing ceremonies.
filovirus Posted January 22, 2016 Posted January 22, 2016 On 1/21/2016 at 11:38 AM, Russell C McGregor said: I've noticed a correlation between the decrease in the religious content of wedding ceremonies, and an increase in the visible ostentation thereof. IOW, the less religion in the wedding, the more show has to be put on. It's almost as if the secularizers are trying to compensate for the lack of something. 14 minutes ago, cinepro said: We're not talking about sealing ceremonies. My mistake. I thought when Russell mentioned "wedding ceremonies" he actually meant the wedding ceremony. That, in the case of temple recommend holding members, would be the sealing done in the temple and not the celebration where a DJ would attend. For all others, that would be the nuptials. I see you are talking about what Mormons would call the "reception". So yes, you are probably right that culture and wealth can and often times does affect how the reception is conducted. I just watched a viral video on Facebook showing an impressive display of the "Haka". I love how their culture was incorporated.
Recommended Posts