Prayer Request from Houston Temple Presidency

[Darren10]

24 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Mormons watch movies???????? I hope just at home and not in the theater!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You will never get to take communion in a Mennonite church by having such low "standards of living!" Now don't tell me Mormons still dance?!?!  Speaking TIC - tongue in cheek - just kidding. Besides it is 2:27 in the morning. I am not responsible for anything I am writing! 

[Navidad]

2 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"I am not LDS so I will never be given the temple recommend test" - No worries. We Mormons always have hope you'll eventually get one.

I know that very well! Hey, one last question tonight that is temple-related. Do you all think that most Mormons are aware of the Temple Hill prophecy that took place here in Pacheco? There is a monument at the spot and quite a wonderful story about it. I was there several weeks ago helping the bishop guide a LDS group. The grandparents were telling their grand kids about the prophecy. I am wondering if that prophecy is common knowledge across the Church?  I enjoy putting together short articles with photos about important events in colony history; I thought I might do one on the Temple Hill Prophecy. 

[Darren10]

1 minute ago, Navidad said:

I know that very well! Hey, one last question tonight that is temple-related. Do you all think that most Mormons are aware of the Temple Hill prophecy that took place here in Pacheco? There is a monument at the spot and quite a wonderful story about it. I was there several weeks ago helping the bishop guide a LDS group. The grandparents were telling their grand kids about the prophecy. I am wondering if that prophecy is common knowledge across the Church?  I enjoy putting together short articles with photos about important events in colony history; I thought I might do one on the Temple Hill Prophecy. 

Mormon history is by no means my strong point so consider thay when I say I've no idea what that prophecy is. 

[Blah]

I tried to read this thread but after about a page and a half my eyes went cross.

I'm a church employee and have worked in the Houston Temple for 12 years. I attended an employee meeting today and tomorrow will be onsite adding my meagre contribution to the reconstruction efforts.

I had a particular post in this thread to which I wanted to respond but now I can't remember and I'm afraid that if I go back and try to reread the thread I may actually lose the will to live.

 

So, yeah...stuff.

[Calm]

On 2017-09-06 at 2:59 AM, Navidad said:

I know that very well! Hey, one last question tonight that is temple-related. Do you all think that most Mormons are aware of the Temple Hill prophecy that took place here in Pacheco? There is a monument at the spot and quite a wonderful story about it. I was there several weeks ago helping the bishop guide a LDS group. The grandparents were telling their grand kids about the prophecy. I am wondering if that prophecy is common knowledge across the Church?  I enjoy putting together short articles with photos about important events in colony history; I thought I might do one on the Temple Hill Prophecy. 

Since this thread is the only thing that comes up on a search of "temple hill prophecy" and "Pacheco", I suspect very few have heard of it. I haven't, at least by that name.

I assume this is it?

http://bluthfamilyforever.blogspot.com/2013/08/miracles-of-temple-hill-in-pacheco.html

Edited September 9, 2017 by Calm

[Navidad]

33 minutes ago, Calm said:

Since this thread is the only thing that comes up on a search of "temple hill prophecy" and "Pacheco", I suspect very few have heard of it. I haven't, at least by that name.

I assume this is it?

http://bluthfamilyforever.blogspot.com/2013/08/miracles-of-temple-hill-in-pacheco.html

Thanks. Yes, that is the basic account. It is very important to the saints here in the colonies. I am told the painting hangs in the lobby of the temple in Colonia Juarez. Thanks for the time and attention you paid to my inquiry. I appreciate it. Temple Hill is indeed a very beautiful spot. 

[mfbukowski]

On 8/30/2017 at 3:18 PM, rongo said:

You're correct. He does indeed allow for the realization of blessings to be contingent on our asking for them. This isn't as harsh as I remembered.

I still disagree with him that we can't get God to change his mind/will, at times (cf. scriptural precedent).

I don't know, this whole line of reasoning just sounds a little fishy.  It's a little like he's sitting back, knowing what blessings are available and saying "Sorry you have to ask me first".   All the while i could fly like a bird but never knew it was there for my asking only if......

That's a silly example but you get the idea.  It's like we are sitting here with no idea of the potential and he's not telling us what we could have.

I agree that God can change- otherwise he could not answer prayers.

[mfbukowski]

On 8/30/2017 at 6:35 PM, Darren10 said:

Mormon helping hands are waiting.

My son spent a few days in a yellow t shirt

[mfbukowski]

On 8/30/2017 at 6:44 PM, jkwilliams said:

I hope this is OK to post, but we've set up a fund to help my daughter and her husband get back into their home.

 We do not allow individual advertising

Oh yeah!  We should remind each other of this rule by copying this post wherever we can.

[mfbukowski]

On 8/30/2017 at 11:25 PM, Calm said:

I am wondering now I am thinking about it if the picture with the hand in the air claiming water is 6 feet deep is for real.  For one, the temple president said the current was dangerous.  For two, I think this is the same place and the grass would appear to be on flat land:

https://www.ldstemple.pics/store/houston-temple-sunrise-west/

Can someone familiar with the temple confirm if it is deep enough for the hand above the water picture to be of a 5'8" man standing up with his hand over his head (he should be floating unless he has weights on his feet, right?) or is it a scam and he is really just lying down (which is still probably two feet deepish)?

Google maps indicates a pretty flat surface with a road...not deep at all.

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9998169,-95.5329894,19z/data=!3m1!1e3

Champion Forest Drive...

Dunno if this has been answered, but there could be a kind of "moat" there for stormwater which would not show on google or the photo.  Just sayin...

We also heard last night through the temple that it had been opened up for sheltering people, possibly on the second floor.... dunno about that either

[mfbukowski]

On 9/2/2017 at 6:44 AM, Pete Ahlstrom said:

Maybe I can take a stab at this? The answer is in how the religious are conditioned to view the world. The coincidence of the flood waters not touching the Houston temple in 2016 was heralded as a miracle. However, that didn't happen in the current, terrible flooding from Harvey. It looks like yet another random occurrence where sometimes things work out and sometimes they don't. Some cancer victims pass away even though many prayers and priesthood blessings were offered while some survive and it is viewed as a miracle.

Religion teaches its adherents to view the positive outcomes as being from God and to almost instantaneously justify in some way why the miracle didn't happen when it doesn't. God is mysterious the religious say. No one can know his ways. So and so was needed on the other side for some rationalized reason. So, given this conditioning, it isn't remarkable that the flooding wouldn't cause the religious to bat an eye even though the so-called miracle of 2016 didn't happen now.

And of course you are not conditioned to think your way at all.

What a hoot!

I posted this elsewhere but what the heck- I will give you a rubber stamp answer for your rubber stamp post

"This is a perfect example of what happens when you confuse the scientific view of the correspondence theory of truth with a pragmatic or deflationary theory of truth.

Nonsense.

God cannot be discovered though science.

I thought we figured that out in the 15th century with Cardinal Bellarmine and Galileo but I guess not.

Sigh.  It's Scopes all over again but now science has the upper hand culturally so we get to do it all over again from the other side.  

It used to be science was wrong because it did not agree with religion, now it's religion must be wrong because it doesn't agree with science.   Same argument, different sides!

Science and religion have nothing to do with each other.

The belief that science and religion discuss the same topic always leads to this nonsense but we never learn.  We repeat this again and again.

Our great grandchildren will know philosophy better, maybe in the 22nd century perhaps they will learn two hundred year old twentieth century philosophy and be rid of this nonsense."

[mfbukowski]

On 9/5/2017 at 2:40 PM, Navidad said:

It seems I would violate the temple because I am not LDS.  If I were LDS and didn't have a temple recommend, that would be something different.

Wrong.  Where did you get that one?   It's not different at all.  The bishop certifies that you have answered the questions correctly and you get a recommend.

If you have lied that's between you and God.

 

[Navidad]

34 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

And of course you are not conditioned to think your way at all.

What a hoot!

I posted this elsewhere but what the heck- I will give you a rubber stamp answer for your rubber stamp post

"This is a perfect example of what happens when you confuse the scientific view of the correspondence theory of truth with a pragmatic or deflationary theory of truth.

Nonsense.

God cannot be discovered though science.

I thought we figured that out in the 15th century with Cardinal Bellarmine and Galileo but I guess not.

Sigh.  It's Scopes all over again but now science has the upper hand culturally so we get to do it all over again from the other side.  

It used to be science was wrong because it did not agree with religion, now it's religion must be wrong because it doesn't agree with science.   Same argument, different sides!

Science and religion have nothing to do with each other.

The belief that science and religion discuss the same topic always leads to this nonsense but we never learn.  We repeat this again and again.

Our great grandchildren will know philosophy better, maybe in the 22nd century perhaps they will learn two hundred year old twentieth century philosophy and be rid of this nonsense."

I am sure a pragmatist would appreciate the reminder that Bellarmine and Galileo dust up was 17th century, not 15th century. And remember Scopes lost the trial. William Jennings Bryan won the case. Scopes was fined $100. The conviction was later overturned because the judge set the fine, not the jury.  Having said all that tongue in cheek; i agree with you about science and religion. 

[Navidad]

40 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Wrong.  Where did you get that one?   It's not different at all.  The bishop certifies that you have answered the questions correctly and you get a recommend.

If you have lied that's between you and God.

 

Sorry my friend, I guess I didn't make myself clear and maybe it was a silly thing to say. My point was I could answer all but one of the temple recommendation questions truthfully in the affirmative (I have seen two lists of questions - either one would yield the same result for me). However I would never be asked the questions, and I couldn't answer one of them in the affirmative solely because I am not LDS, therefore I would never be asked the questions and I would have to answer one question in the negative because I can't sustain the president of the church as is required. Not because as I believed was being implied that my deficit lifestyle values are what would cause me to violate the sanctity of the temple.  I never mentioned anything about lying. I believed the poster was implying that my lifestyle values were such that I would violate the temple if I walked in and  I found that statement offensive since she knows nothing about my values.  Once again I read it as a Mormon assuming that a non-Mormon must by an apriori assumption have lesser values.  Too complicated. I am sorry I said it. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Dunno if this has been answered, but there could be a kind of "moat" there for stormwater which would not show on google or the photo.  Just sayin...

We also heard last night through the temple that it had been opened up for sheltering people, possibly on the second floor.... dunno about that either

A friend who lives in the area says it does drop even if it can't be seen on googlemaps, it appears to him the photo is real...at least the water was that deep.  Wondering how the guy managed to stay upright if the current was so strong, but I am not going to suggest it is fake because I don't know.

seems strange place to shelter, perhaps there is a kitchen and laundry available?  Though I would think that in the basement and in need of renovating.

[jkwilliams]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh yeah!  We should remind each other of this rule by copying this post wherever we can.

Not advertising seems to be working, as we are almost at our goal. In the meantime, I am sure enjoying having my granddaughter around.

[Pete Ahlstrom]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

And of course you are not conditioned to think your way at all.

What a hoot!

I posted this elsewhere but what the heck- I will give you a rubber stamp answer for your rubber stamp post

"This is a perfect example of what happens when you confuse the scientific view of the correspondence theory of truth with a pragmatic or deflationary theory of truth.

Nonsense.

God cannot be discovered though science.

I thought we figured that out in the 15th century with Cardinal Bellarmine and Galileo but I guess not.

Sigh.  It's Scopes all over again but now science has the upper hand culturally so we get to do it all over again from the other side.  

It used to be science was wrong because it did not agree with religion, now it's religion must be wrong because it doesn't agree with science.   Same argument, different sides!

Science and religion have nothing to do with each other.

The belief that science and religion discuss the same topic always leads to this nonsense but we never learn.  We repeat this again and again.

Our great grandchildren will know philosophy better, maybe in the 22nd century perhaps they will learn two hundred year old twentieth century philosophy and be rid of this nonsense."

Maybe I am missing something here but it seems that the story about the Houston temple, a building built in a flood plain, being saved from flooding in 2016 was a "miracle" manufactured from a lucky coincidence. That was clearly shown when Harvey went ahead and caused the "miracle" temple to be flooded recently. No "miracle" today. Why do you think it was flooded today? Was it really a "miracle" last year or someone at lds living fooling him or herself into seeing something that was never there? It seems the latter given the recent flooding of our "miracle" temple.

Edited September 11, 2017 by Pete Ahlstrom

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

Maybe I am missing something here but it seems that the story about the Houston temple, a building built in a flood plain, being saved from flooding in 2016 was a "miracle" manufactured from a lucky coincidence. That was clearly shown when Harvey went ahead and caused the "miracle" temple to be flooded recently. No "miracle" today. Why do you think it was flooded today? Was it really a "miracle" last year or someone at lds living fooling him or herself into seeing something that was never there? It seems the latter given the recent flooding of our "miracle" temple.

You are not missing "something" you are missing the whole point of religion, as usual

My earlier point stands.

You are not getting this at all, you still are thinking of religious truth corresponding to something outside the believer and the function of religion to be to tell us facts about the outside world- it is not.  It's not about "miracles exist" corresponding with a state of the world at all.

It is about creating our mental worlds out of matter unorganized.   It is about creating parables, stories and lessons that TEACH US, but you are seeing it scientifically.

The miracle that saved the temple then told its parable of trust in the Lord

The flooding teaches us even though we trust in the Lord, still bad things happen to good people.  So when bad things happen to good people what do we do?  We go to our community for support, we learn how to deal with adversity and never let it get us down because the Lord is always there for us.

EVERYTHING that happens is to teach us HOW TO LIVE BETTER THAN WE HAVE, through good and bad!!

Religion is about creating meaning in our lives, not about statements about how the world works- it is about how to change your attitude when the world hands you- whatever.

You guys never get that!

That is why you left, and you have learned nothing from leaving.  You are still stuck on that point.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with "facts" about the "existence of miracles" or "God making an exception for us" or NOT making an exception for us

It's about our attitudes and how to see misfortune and good fortune.  Read Alma 32 until this sinks in.

Religion is about what beliefs become "sweet" to us and grow in our lives and help get us through the dark nights of death and tragedy.   They are not about facts in the world.   But there are silly religious people just as there are silly non-religious people who do not get it, hence this thread.

Edited September 11, 2017 by mfbukowski

[MorningStar]

A friend who went down to help said once black mold develops in people's homes, only professionals will be allowed to work on them.   My husband is certified in mold remediation (don't know if that certificate expired or not), but we live so far away.  And he's not licensed - he used to work for an insurance restoration company. 

[Pete Ahlstrom]

17 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

You are not missing "something" you are missing the whole point of religion, as usual

My earlier point stands.

You are not getting this at all, you still are thinking of religious truth corresponding to something outside the believer and the function of religion to be to tell us facts about the outside world- it is not.  It's not about "miracles exist" corresponding with a state of the world at all.

It is about creating our mental worlds out of matter unorganized.   It is about creating parables, stories and lessons that TEACH US, but you are seeing it scientifically.

The miracle that saved the temple then told its parable of trust in the Lord

The flooding teaches us even though we trust in the Lord, still bad things happen to good people.  So when bad things happen to good people what do we do?  We go to our community for support, we learn how to deal with adversity and never let it get us down because the Lord is always there for us.

EVERYTHING that happens is to teach us HOW TO LIVE BETTER THAN WE HAVE, through good and bad!!

Religion is about creating meaning in our lives, not about statements about how the world works- it is about how to change your attitude when the world hands you- whatever.

You guys never get that!

That is why you left, and you have learned nothing from leaving.  You are still stuck on that point.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with "facts" about the "existence of miracles" or "God making an exception for us" or NOT making an exception for us

It's about our attitudes and how to see misfortune and good fortune.  Read Alma 32 until this sinks in.

Religion is about what beliefs become "sweet" to us and grow in our lives and help get us through the dark nights of death and tragedy.   They are not about facts in the world.   But there are silly religious people just as there are silly non-religious people who do not get it, hence this thread.

My point was limited to the mistaken belief that the Houston temple was somehow "miraculously" saved from flooding in 2016. It's in a 100 year floodplain, which means that on average, it will experience flooding once every 100 years. So it isn't a miracle at all that it escaped flooding in 2016 as is shown by the flooding now. 

Shouldn't the religious be careful in what they attribute to a "miracle?" Or should they be allowed to say anything because they are religious and religion is different from science?

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, Navidad said:

Sorry my friend, I guess I didn't make myself clear and maybe it was a silly thing to say. My point was I could answer all but one of the temple recommendation questions truthfully in the affirmative (I have seen two lists of questions - either one would yield the same result for me). However I would never be asked the questions, and I couldn't answer one of them in the affirmative solely because I am not LDS, therefore I would never be asked the questions and I would have to answer one question in the negative because I can't sustain the president of the church as is required. Not because as I believed was being implied that my deficit lifestyle values are what would cause me to violate the sanctity of the temple.  I never mentioned anything about lying. I believed the poster was implying that my lifestyle values were such that I would violate the temple if I walked in and  I found that statement offensive since she knows nothing about my values.  Once again I read it as a Mormon assuming that a non-Mormon must by an apriori assumption have lesser values.  Too complicated. I am sorry I said it. 

No actually that helps me understand you better, so thanks for the answer.  So no coffee and no wine, liquor etc, right?  It's not that those are inherently evil by any stretch of the imagination- they are actually more like social barriers to remind us who we are when we are in the world but not of the world.   It is just odd that a non-member would practice that without some kind of reason to do so.  I mean really- coffee?  Why would anyone voluntarily not drink coffee or have an occasional glass of wine or a beer on a cold day?   As a convert I honestly miss that but my covenants set me apart and I honor that.

It's not about "lesser values", it is about a voluntary acceptance of what sets us apart as a community- kind of like is it a "SIN" for Amish to ..... whatever we would see as "normal behavior"- perhaps drive a car?  Do we have "lesser values" because we drive cars?

BUT  back to the subject---  In my opinion much of the temple recommend interview is about how far we have been inculcated into the culture BECAUSE much of what we are taught there symbolically is based on "deep doctrine", the council of Gods, the nature of the fall of Adam as a "good thing" which gives us freedom of choice, the "personal history" of God as a human and other doctrines that people off the street, even if "worthy" would find difficult to accept.

I mean are you a mason?   Would you join masonry?  Why would you want to know what happens in, or to enter into, a masonic temple?   What's the big deal to you?

It's really not about "worthiness" to get in, in my opinion, it is about how far you are into BELIEVING the doctrine and culture and the acid test is whether or not you accept Joseph as a prophet seer and revelator

Without that, everything else would appear as nonsense anyway- so why would you WANT to even get in, in the first place?

All the doctrine taught is out there in the world in the King Follet discourse etc- but unless you accept it it would be pretty pointless for you to say, promise to live by the King Follet discourse.

I mean that is NOT in the temple, but it would be LIKE that for you.

The temple is for making promises to God to be a better Mormon.  Do you really want to promise God to be a better Mormon??

I don't think so!!

 

[mfbukowski]

10 minutes ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

My point was limited to the mistaken belief that the Houston temple was somehow "miraculously" saved from flooding in 2016. It's in a 100 year floodplain, which means that on average, it will experience flooding once every 100 years. So it isn't a miracle at all that it escaped flooding in 2016 as is shown by the flooding now. 

Shouldn't the religious be careful in what they attribute to a "miracle?" Or should they be allowed to say anything because they are religious and religion is different from science?

HUH?

No, you should be careful in what you say to offend the religious.  Haven't you heard about poltiical correctness?

Seriously you are sounding a little obsessive compulsive there, dude, limiting the freedom of religious speech.  

I tell you what- you keep talking your way and I will keep talking my way and we will just keep arguing about semantics forever!   Good idea??

It's the AMERICAN WAY!!

Better yet, let's just ban the word and persecute people who use it in whatever sense.   Much better.

Cheesh.

[Pete Ahlstrom]

7 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

HUH?

No, you should be careful in what you say to offend the religious.  Haven't you heard about poltiical correctness?

Seriously you are sounding a little obsessive compulsive there, dude, limiting the freedom of religious speech.  

I tell you what- you keep talking your way and I will keep talking my way and we will just keep arguing about semantics forever!   Good idea??

It's the AMERICAN WAY!!

Better yet, let's just ban the word and persecute people who use it in whatever sense.   Much better.

Cheesh.

I was kind of hoping you would admit it was a mistake calling the 2016 non-flooding of the houston temple a "miracle." I guess I was hoping for a miracle myself. Instead I get more of the same from you.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

I was kind of hoping you would admit it was a mistake calling the 2016 non-flooding of the houston temple a "miracle." I guess I was hoping for a miracle myself. Instead I get more of the same from you.

So you thought I would be inconsistent?  Not likely

You can have a miracle today if you just see it that way.  Don't try to blame me for the way you see the world.  Half full or half empty of miracles?  You see it as you wish.  That is precisely what you do not understand.

As Wittgenstein would say, do you see this "AS" a duck or a rabbit?  You will see it as both a fake duck and fake rabbit and miss the point entirely

I am quoting W here to show you this is a matter of real philosophy I am referencing.  "Seeing as" is everything.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations

Quote

 

 Within the analytic tradition, the book is considered by many as being one of the most important philosophical works of the 20th century, and it continues to influence contemporary philosophers, especially those studying mind and language.^[1]

 

Seeing that vs. seeing as[edit]

The duck-rabbit, made famous by Wittgenstein

Quote

 

In addition to ambiguous sentences, Wittgenstein discussed figures that can be seen and understood in two different ways. Often one can see something in a straightforward way — seeing that it is a rabbit, perhaps. But, at other times, one notices a particular aspect — seeing it as something.

An example Wittgenstein uses is the "duckrabbit", an ambiguous image that can be seen as either a duck or a rabbit.[32] When one looks at the duck-rabbit and sees a rabbit, one is not interpreting the picture as a rabbit, but rather reporting what one sees. One just sees the picture as a rabbit. But what occurs when one sees it first as a duck, then as a rabbit? As the gnomic remarks in the Investigationsindicate, Wittgenstein isn't sure. However, he is sure that it could not be the case that the external world stays the same while an 'internal' cognitive change takes place.

 

 

Edited September 11, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Navidad]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

No actually that helps me understand you better, so thanks for the answer.  So no coffee and no wine, liquor etc, right?  It's not that those are inherently evil by any stretch of the imagination- they are actually more like social barriers to remind us who we are when we are in the world but not of the world.   It is just odd that a non-member would practice that without some kind of reason to do so.  I mean really- coffee?  Why would anyone voluntarily not drink coffee or have an occasional glass of wine or a beer on a cold day?   As a convert I honestly miss that but my covenants set me apart and I honor that.

It's not about "lesser values", it is about a voluntary acceptance of what sets us apart as a community- kind of like is it a "SIN" for Amish to ..... whatever we would see as "normal behavior"- perhaps drive a car?  Do we have "lesser values" because we drive cars?

BUT  back to the subject---  In my opinion much of the temple recommend interview is about how far we have been inculcated into the culture BECAUSE much of what we are taught there symbolically is based on "deep doctrine", the council of Gods, the nature of the fall of Adam as a "good thing" which gives us freedom of choice, the "personal history" of God as a human and other doctrines that people off the street, even if "worthy" would find difficult to accept.

I mean are you a mason?   Would you join masonry?  Why would you want to know what happens in, or to enter into, a masonic temple?   What's the big deal to you?

It's really not about "worthiness" to get in, in my opinion, it is about how far you are into BELIEVING the doctrine and culture and the acid test is whether or not you accept Joseph as a prophet seer and revelator

Without that, everything else would appear as nonsense anyway- so why would you WANT to even get in, in the first place?

All the doctrine taught is out there in the world in the King Follet discourse etc- but unless you accept it it would be pretty pointless for you to say, promise to live by the King Follet discourse.

I mean that is NOT in the temple, but it would be LIKE that for you.

The temple is for making promises to God to be a better Mormon.  Do you really want to promise God to be a better Mormon??

I don't think so!!

 

Do you really no kidding believe that Mormons are the only faith group who have "social barriers to remind us who we are in the world but not of the world?"  Do you not realize there are most likely millions of Christians who don't drink out of the same conviction? I don't drink coffee because I don't like coffee, not out of conviction; I don't want to sound noble about that. What I am saying is that I have probably lived my life with greater "social barriers" than any Mormon I know; and I would only like to suggest there are many more just like me.  It doesn't make me or them more spiritual or "better than" Mormons. Although in candor, I will confess to thinking the last few weeks that Mormons might even be a bit better off spiritually if there was something in the Word of Wisdom or in the temple interview about "spiritual humility." 

The bottom line in my experience (I am carefully identifying it as that) is that your having proscriptions to ensure faithfulness to a strict standard of faithfulness does not "set you apart." Sorry about that. It is not special, unique, or different. There are many, many, many non-Mormon Christians, and Christian traditions with, in many cases identical and in some cases different, and yes, stricter standards to achieve separation and to commit to an identity apart from the "world."

It is Mormons who talk about others have "lesser values," assuming as I have read on this forum that if a Mormon and a non-Mormon are in the same room the Mormon will be sure to have the higher standards, great commitment, etc, not the Amish, Pentecostal,  or Baptist. I read that Mormons should not date non-Mormons because they will be pressured to "lower their standards." That is an apriori assumption that, in some cases may be true, but in many not. It is Mormons who assume a moral and spiritual superiority, "being set apart" by their uniquenesses.  Certainly, you cannot have such a blind-spot (in a Johari window sense) so as not to recognize that.

Oh, and to answer your question; yes, I am a Master Mason. I understand the rule about non-Masons being in the lodge when it is in session. It is a rule, no more; no less. I became a Mason after much the same process of exploration that I began when I began studying Mormon history and doctrine.

I am happy, willing, and came to this forum granting my Mormon friends a spiritual, moral equivalency to my faith's commitment to living a Christ-honoring life, one that was neither above nor below my own. This forum in just three short weeks has revealed to me a Mormon spiritual superiority complex that disappoints me. Let me reiterate; I don't want to get in anymore. The culture is much more a barrier to me than the doctrine.

Oh, and I live every day without a thought to ever asking God to make me a better Mennonite. I do pray every day for God to help be to be a better Christian.