Pope Francis and President Nelson (and Catholic/Mormon history)

[ALarson]

24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Sharing the history is one thing. Repeatedly dredging it up as though it were a live issue a half-century after the fact is another. 

Who has "repeatedly" dredged it up?  And what is "it" exactly?

My comments were completely on topic and in response to others.  There are new posters here too who are interested in why certain beliefs began (even if they are no longer taught by any leaders and that was made clear).  You brought much more attention to it by repeatedly posting about it which is kind of ironic if you don't want to discuss it.

Certain things are a part of our history and will most likely come up in any discussion regarding them.  I think that's very natural and normal on any discussion board.  I think it's odd when someone acts like they simply can't imagine why some members used to believe certain things.  There's a history and a reason for most of them.

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by ALarson

[mrmarklin]

8 hours ago, the narrator said:

I don't think there is any discomfort. I think it just points to how small potatoes the LDS Church is. (Unless we are talking $$$. In that case the total assets of the LDS Church dwarfs that of the Catholic Church.)

You’re kidding right?

The treasures in the Vatican Museum  alone probably dwarf the net worth of the LDS Church.  Not to mention the incredible art in many of the churches containing many pieces from the greatest artists in the world. 

[sjdawg]

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When did you serve? I question your memory on Mormon Doctrine. 

93-95

for sure my memory could be off on this.  I hadn’t thought about it in a lot of years

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, sjdawg said:

93-95

for sure my memory could be off on this.  I hadn’t thought about it in a lot of years

I served around that time. Your memory is off. 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I served around that time. You're memory is off. 

Why would my son have it in 2008? I'll have to ask if he was told that was a book he needed to get.

[Hamba Tuhan]

14 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Why would my son have it in 2008? I'll have to ask if he was told that was a book he needed to get.

I'm certain he wasn't told to.

When I served, the Missionary Reference Library consisted of five texts in four volumes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Articles of Faith
• A Marvelous Work and a Wonder
• Truth Restored/Gospel Principles.

[JulieM]

29 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Why would my son have it in 2008? I'll have to ask if he was told that was a book he needed to get.

Maybe it’s up to each mission President (what he wants his missionaries to bring to serve in his mission)?

That would explain why some may have been asked to bring it and others weren’t.  I don’t know, but maybe?

Edited March 12, 2019 by JulieM

[USU78]

2 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Maybe it’s up to each mission President (what he wants his missionaries to bring to serve in his mission)?

That would explain why some may have been asked to bring it and others weren’t.  I don’t know, but maybe?

Very possibly. I remember in early 70s getting a "Recommend You Buy" list from my mission prez' office. Jesus the Christ, Marvelous Work and a Wonder, and the Articles of Faith were only non scripture books recommended.

I bought McConkie on my own.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Just now, JulieM said:

Maybe it’s up to each mission President (what he wants his missionaries to bring to serve in his mission)?

The Missionary Reference Library, which is updated from time to time, is published by the Church. Currently, it includes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Our Search for Happiness
• True to the Faith
• Our Heritage.

[JulieM]

20 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The Missionary Reference Library, which is updated from time to time, is published by the Church. Currently, it includes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Our Search for Happiness
• True to the Faith
• Our Heritage.

Yes, I get there’s a set Reference Library.  But maybe Mission Presidents can also recommend or require some books for the missionaries serving in their missions. I don’t know, but it seems possible if they wanted their missionaries to study or have certain reference books in addition to the ones listed.

It’s one possible explanation if some are asked to have this book.

Edited March 12, 2019 by JulieM

[Scott Lloyd]

39 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm certain he wasn't told to.

When I served, the Missionary Reference Library consisted of five texts in four volumes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Articles of Faith
• A Marvelous Work and a Wonder
• Truth Restored/Gospel Principles.

This is consistent with my own experience, except for Gospel Principles, which hadn’t been written yet. I served in 1974-76. 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

20 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The Missionary Reference Library, which is updated from time to time, is published by the Church. Currently, it includes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Our Search for Happiness
• True to the Faith
• Our Heritage.

This is consistent with my own understanding. 

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Yes, I get there’s a set Reference Library.  But maybe Mission Presidents can also recommend or require some books for the missionaries serving in their missions. I don’t know, but it seems possible if they wanted their missionaries to study or have certain reference books in addition to the ones listed.

No, I don’t believe that’s the case. The list of recommended books for missionaries has always been standard and very limited. The Church hasn’t wanted missionaries weighed down with books. For one thing, Mormon Doctrine is way too heavy to carry from transfer to transfer, even in paperback. For another, it has never enjoyed the quasi-official status in the Church that the other mentioned books have been afforded. 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Stargazer]

On 3/11/2019 at 2:05 AM, Tacenda said:

The church surely felt differently as early as 1984 when I went to the temple for the first time and it was a Catholic Priest being portrayed as Satan. All the way up to the 1990's, I'm thinking. But very glad the church saw the error in putting that in the movie at the temple and it's no longer there. 

 

21 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

It seems there is a character in the temple ceremony who is some sort of priest/preacher and is connected to the devil. Is it possible to tell me more about that or would that be going into too much detail? I'm just intrigued because it's been brought up a few times now and I am wondering what the character's purpose was -- what teaching was being made.

I'm not looking to be offended, just to be clear  I'm just curious.

 

This has been discussed a bit but I just wanted to clear it up a bit more.

The character in question was not portrayed as Satan.  The character was portrayed as a generic Christian clergyman (looked very Protestant to me), who had been deceived by Satan and was teaching false doctrine.  Upon discovering that he had been deceived, he immediately turned away from the false teaching. He requested payment for his work as a preacher, but was denied.  End of scene.  Lessons: (1) the Christian world suffers from false doctrine; (2) many of those who teach false doctrine are honorable and will repent upon learning of their mistake; and (3) Satan has no loyalty to those he deceives.

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

 

This has been discussed a bit but I just wanted to clear it up a bit more.

The character in question was not portrayed as Satan.  The character was portrayed as a generic Christian clergyman (looked very Protestant to me), who had been deceived by Satan and was teaching false doctrine.  Upon discovering that he had been deceived, he immediately turned away from the false teaching. He requested payment for his work as a preacher, but was denied.  End of scene.  Lessons: (1) the Christian world suffers from false doctrine; (2) many of those who teach false doctrine are honorable and will repent upon learning of their mistake; and (3) Satan has no loyalty to those he deceives.

I did not know that originally there were more than one Christian minister portrayed.  After reading some of the interesting posts here about this yesterday, I tried to look up the origins and more information on this.

I found this interesting:

“Originally, everyone participating in the endowment took the roles of Adam and Eve collectively (Van Dusen 1847). Using temple workers to represent Adam, Eve, and the Christian minister began in the 1850s in Endowment House administrations in Utah. But in Nauvoo, several actors depicted ministers from different Christian churches. The first published indication of the ministers occurs in 1857 (Cook, 37-42). The first published account of a single minister appears in 1905 (‘Mormon’ 1905).”

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V20N04_35.pdf

Edited March 12, 2019 by JulieM

[Hestia]

@USU78 knock off the personal insults.  I'd ban you from the thread but can't figure out how to do it since the board update.  If that changes....

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

 

This has been discussed a bit but I just wanted to clear it up a bit more.

The character in question was not portrayed as Satan.  The character was portrayed as a generic Christian clergyman (looked very Protestant to me), who had been deceived by Satan and was teaching false doctrine.  Upon discovering that he had been deceived, he immediately turned away from the false teaching. He requested payment for his work as a preacher, but was denied.  End of scene.  Lessons: (1) the Christian world suffers from false doctrine; (2) many of those who teach false doctrine are honorable and will repent upon learning of their mistake; and (3) Satan has no loyalty to those he deceives.

Thanks for clearing that up. But the current one is portrayed as Satan isn't it? I have a friend who's father played Satan in the live sessions and said it was. So a little confused. But you're right, now that I searched my memory about the minister. 

Edited March 12, 2019 by Tacenda

[bluebell]

42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for clearing that up. But the current one is portrayed as Satan isn't it? I have a friend who's father played Satan in the live sessions and said it was. So a little confused. But you're right, now that I searched my memory about the minister. 

There is a person who portrays satan, but he's not affiliated with any church or religion.  He's just regular old satan as he's spoken of in the Garden of Eden in the bible.

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Hestia said:

@USU78 knock off the personal insults.  I'd ban you from the thread but can't figure out how to do it since the board update.  If that changes....

Oh, no! It's going to be a Lord of the Flies free-for-all now!  

[pogi]

17 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm certain he wasn't told to.

When I served, the Missionary Reference Library consisted of five texts in four volumes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Articles of Faith
• A Marvelous Work and a Wonder
• Truth Restored/Gospel Principles.

I served 98-00, those are the books we used too.  

17 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Why would my son have it in 2008? I'll have to ask if he was told that was a book he needed to get.

I can all but guarantee that it was not part of the missionary library in 2008...or ever.  I don't doubt that he had it, but that doesn't mean it was suggested reading as part of the library. 

Edited March 12, 2019 by pogi

[bluebell]

17 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I'm certain he wasn't told to.

When I served, the Missionary Reference Library consisted of five texts in four volumes:

• Jesus the Christ
• Articles of Faith
• A Marvelous Work and a Wonder
• Truth Restored/Gospel Principles.

That list was the same for me when I served 1998-99.  Together they were called the "missionary library" and we were instructed not to bring any other books with us, other than our scriptures.

[Tacenda]

8 hours ago, JulieM said:

I did not know that originally there were more than one Christian minister portrayed.  After reading some of the interesting posts here about this yesterday, I tried to look up the origins and more information on this.

I found this interesting:

“Originally, everyone participating in the endowment took the roles of Adam and Eve collectively (Van Dusen 1847). Using temple workers to represent Adam, Eve, and the Christian minister began in the 1850s in Endowment House administrations in Utah. But in Nauvoo, several actors depicted ministers from different Christian churches. The first published indication of the ministers occurs in 1857 (Cook, 37-42). The first published account of a single minister appears in 1905 (‘Mormon’ 1905).”

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V20N04_35.pdf

I find this interesting, in light of those that think that Freemasonry stems from the temple of Solomon. 

Pg. 40 https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V20N04_35.pdf

"Some Latter-day Saints may feel that Masonry constitutes a biblical-times source of uncorrupted knowledge from which the temple ceremony could be drawn. Historians of Freemasonry, however, generally agree that the trigradal system of entered apprentice, fellow craft, and master Mason, as practiced in Nauvoo, cannot reliably be traced further back than the eighteenth century. According to Douglas Knoop and G. P. Jones, two twentieth-century historians,7 it is "highly probable" that the system of Masonry practiced at the organization of the Grand Lodge in London "did not consist of three distinct degrees" and warn, "It would probably not be safe to fix a date earlier than 1723 or 1725 for the origin" of the trigradal system. "Accepted Masonry underwent gradual changes throughout a period of years stretching from well before 1717 to well after that date. . . . The earliest speculative phase of Freemasonry may be regarded as beginning about 1730. . . . Though some symbolism had doubtless crept into Masonry by that date, it would not appear to have reached its full development for another forty or fifty years" (1949, 274, 275,321,322). "

[Tacenda]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

There is a person who portrays satan, but he's not affiliated with any church or religion.  He's just regular old satan as he's spoken of in the Garden of Eden in the bible.

My memory tells me there was a minister and a Lucifer in the earlier versions, unless I'm mistaken. So maybe now, (I haven't been to the newest sessions) there is only Lucifer minus the minister?

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

My memory tells me there was a minister and a Lucifer in the earlier versions, unless I'm mistaken. So maybe now, (I haven't been to the newest sessions) there is only Lucifer minus the minister?

There hasn't been a minister since 1990.

[Hamba Tuhan]

40 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I find this interesting, in light of those that think that Freemasonry stems from the temple of Solomon. 

In many cases, symbols important in Freemasonry have very clear ancient antecedents or parallels. One example comes from America's Casa Grande Ruins National Monument, where, according to the official website, 'the so-called "Square and Compass" emblem, which is carved from a sea shell, has aroused wide interest. It was found about 1925 in the eastern edge of the Casa Grande Village about four feet down in a trash mound of the red-on-buff period and the indications are that it was made by the ancient inhabitants about 1,800 years ago'.

More clear are ancient Chinese analogues relating to the creation myths of Nüwa and Fuxi:

Edited March 13, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan