Ephraim temple announcement revelation or caving to public pressure

[smac97]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That's not what I said.  There is a degree of commonality, but the dependence upon the Holy Spirit is more like that of the Holiness Churches (Pentecostals) within the LDS tradition.  Protestant evangelicals are deeply fearful of dependence upon the Spirit because of what they have seen it do to the Holiness churches.  And they are openly critical of the LDS faith in such dependence.  Their primary source of authority is the text of Scripture (sola scriptura) -- without the possibility of new Scripture.

I wonder if this phenomenon - "fearful of dependence upon the Spirit because of what they have seen it do to the Holiness churches" - arises because there is seemingly no counterbalance, no check, on claims of "the Spirit" in these circumstances.  The Church has revelation at the pinnacle of our efforts to discern the will of God, but we also rely scripture, and living prophets and apostles, and substantial doctrines about stewardship and authority, and our own innate reasoning and observations.  As Elder McConkie put it, "Truth is ever in harmony with itself."  So if someone is doing or saying something that seems a bit "off," it can be tested by utilizing all of these resources.  Thus an untoward or potentially problematic claim of "the Spirit told me so" becomes less disruptive.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Fair Dinkum]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

As far as SL goes, the revelation could have been general, confirmation it was the time to renovate and some basic goals to achieve through the renovations  while the second revelation covered what they should do in regards to problems that had arisen with renovating they were not aware of before. 
 

A revelation in my experience that something is appropriate does not preclude further revelation when the situation is better understood.  

The timeline is undisputed...Claimed revelation for renovation, followed by prayers, protests and plea's followed by another claimed revelation for Ephraim Temple and reversal of previous revelation to modify historic paintings by removal and attempt to preserve..

[rongo]

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

Not just efficiency, but accessibility.  I have never been so don’t know how much it would impact, but guessing wider doors, ramps, or elevators could have destroyed much of the continuity of the murals even if they had remained in place.  Though cutting up the rooms into smaller units (if I understand the intent correctly) sounds like it would do the most damage).

I think that one of the primary goals with Salt Lake is to eliminate the live actor sessions and go to film only. That's a separate issue entirely from the seismological shoring up, but I think that's why they were adamant about eliminating the theme rooms, or moving from room to room. I'm not clear on whether the new announcement means that Manti will continue live actor sessions as the only one left?

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Why can’t administrative decisions be inspired and directed by the Lord.  I was always taught to pray over the crops of my field and involve the Lord in the details of my life. 

It is not as obvious to me that the idea wasn’t revealed.

They can.  But throwing God under the bus when they change their minds on an administrative decision makes God out to be a fool.

[Fair Dinkum]

11 minutes ago, rongo said:

I think that one of the primary goals with Salt Lake is to eliminate the live actor sessions and go to film only. That's a separate issue entirely from the seismological shoring up, but I think that's why they were adamant about eliminating the theme rooms, or moving from room to room. I'm not clear on whether the new announcement means that Manti will continue live actor sessions as the only one left?

I completely understand the need to go to a movie format.  The SLC Temple is THE iconic Temple for the church. The Church is now very Multi cultural and serves the needs of a multitude of languages.  Every member wants to have access to the SL temple. it makes perfect sense to make it user friendly for all temple worthy members.

[Calm]

18 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The timeline is undisputed...Claimed revelation for renovation, followed by prayers, protests and plea's followed by another claimed revelation for Ephraim Temple and reversal of previous revelation to modify historic paintings by removal and attempt to preserve..

Your locked into a specific path of renovation interpretation is not how I am reading the same comments about revelation. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Calm

[CA Steve]

6 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

They can.  But throwing God under the bus when they change their minds on an administrative decision makes God out to be a fool.

I have learned from this thread that for some, God is so powerful that He can actually be driving the bus that runs Him over!

😉

[pogi]

9 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

They can.  But throwing God under the bus when they change their minds on an administrative decision makes God out to be a fool.

I’m not sure I understand.  Where did they throw God under the bus or make him look like a fool.  To me (as I already explained) it makes him look like a considerate and loving parent.  

[MiserereNobis]

Since I've pontificated (hey, I'm Catholic, I have official permission to pontificate  ) on LDS vs. Catholic revelation before, I'll add my thoughts. I think the issue is that the word "revelation" has some pretty heavy connotations: visions, speaking to Jesus face-to-face, etc. Perhaps the word "inspiration" should be used more often? When I pray and am answered, I call it inspiration. God has inspired me to do or not do something that I have asked about. I wouldn't call this a revelation because of the big connotations of that word.

Would both sides of this debate be comfortable using the word inspiration to describe decisions that appear administrative rather than doctrinal?

Is there a difference between inspiration and revelation?

 

[webbles]

21 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

The timeline is undisputed...Claimed revelation for renovation, followed by prayers, protests and plea's followed by another claimed revelation for Ephraim Temple and reversal of previous revelation to modify historic paintings by removal and attempt to preserve..

I think you are ascribing more things to revelation than even the First Presidency is.

Where does it say that the decision to renovate the Manti temple was a revelation?

Where does it say that the decision to remove the murals was a revelation?

[webbles]

2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Or the First Presidency heard the cries of protests and plea's from the people of Manti and reconsidered their decision.  My complaint is the need to claim a revelation for something that is an obvious administrative decision.  Why does it even need to be any thing more than that?

But with the Tooele temple, they did say that it was a reaction to the protests from the people of Erda.  So, why can't this be a revelation?

[Robert F. Smith]

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I wonder if this phenomenon - "fearful of dependence upon the Spirit because of what they have seen it do to the Holiness churches" - arises because there is seemingly no counterbalance, no check, on claims of "the Spirit" in these circumstances.  The Church has revelation at the pinnacle of our efforts to discern the will of God, but we also rely scripture, and living prophets and apostles, and substantial doctrines about stewardship and authority, and our own innate reasoning and observations.  As Elder McConkie put it, "Truth is ever in harmony with itself."  So if someone is doing or saying something that seems a bit "off," it can be tested by utilizing all of these resources.  Thus an untoward or potentially problematic claim of "the Spirit told me so" becomes less disruptive............

Yes.  We are specifically told, for example, not to allow speaking in tongues without someone to translate.

Evangelicals will often speak of feeling "called" to do something, but they will seldom attribute that to the Holy Spirit.

[Fair Dinkum]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Your locked into a specific path of renovation interpretation is not how I am reading the same comments about revelation. 

What exactly is in dispute?  In April of 2019 they announce the renovations and claim God's hand in directing them.  All He_ _ breaks out with protests, marches and petitions to the COB pleading for reconsideration of the path the church is taking which decision will result in the loss of much of what the Manti members loved about their temple and then in May 2021 the church reverses itself and claims revelation and Elder Rasband expects us to believe that none of the protests played into the reversal of their decision?  Sorry I'm not buying it.

[Fair Dinkum]

12 minutes ago, webbles said:

But with the Tooele temple, they did say that it was a reaction to the protests from the people of Erda.  So, why can't this be a revelation?

Good for them, it's what they should have done here.   They were honest and transparent in Erda. I was hoping that they would do the same here but instead chose to play the revelation card and claim the protests had no impact in their reversal.   It stretches incredulity.

[Robert F. Smith]

16 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

.......................

Would both sides of this debate be comfortable using the word inspiration to describe decisions that appear administrative rather than doctrinal?

Is there a difference between inspiration and revelation?

Yes, and LDS people would do well to speak more cautiously about such matters.  When everything is a revelation or miracle, then nothing is a revelation or miracle.

[Fair Dinkum]

18 minutes ago, webbles said:

I think you are ascribing more things to revelation than even the First Presidency is.

Where does it say that the decision to renovate the Manti temple was a revelation?

Where does it say that the decision to remove the murals was a revelation?

Read my earlier posts.  I've already provided quotes on this point.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

I think you are ascribing more things to revelation than even the First Presidency is.

Where does it say that the decision to renovate the Manti temple was a revelation?

Where does it say that the decision to remove the murals was a revelation?

Good points, these.

I think some folks have a facile and blinkered perspective on how revelation in the Church works.  The Brethren are not mindless automatons, incapable of functioning or making a decision until and unless the Lord puts a thought into their heads.  I think the Lord does guide them a lot, in ways large and small.  But I also think the Lord can and does leave them to function and make decisions according to their informed and reasonably-exercised discretion.

Joseph Smith said: “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”  I think the Lord does that quite often.

In D&C 58 the Lord states:

Quote

26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.
27 Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;
28 For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.

We are told three times in the Doctrine & Covenants to "seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom."

Given these circumstances, I think the Lord often allows the decisions made by the Brethren to proceed and/or ratifies them, even if and when decisions result in a misstep or an adverse consequence.  I don't think the Lord will ever let the Brethren err to the point of leading the Church astray, but the historical record makes it pretty clear that he allows them to err in plenty of ways short of that.

And yet, we are still commanded to sustain and honor these men.  Not because of their perfection, but despite their manifest imperfections.  Hence with wisdom we see in Mormon 9:31:

Quote

Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.

And hence the caution we are given by the Lord in 3 Nephi 14:

Quote

1 And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he turned again to the multitude, and did open his mouth unto them again, saying: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother: Let me pull the mote out of thine eye—and behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited May 6, 2021 by smac97

[jkwilliams]

Just now, smac97 said:

Good points, these.

I think some folks have a facile and blinkered perspective on how revelation in the Church works.  The Brethren are not mindless automatons, incapable of functioning or making a decision until and unless the Lord puts a thought into their heads.  I think the Lord does guide them a lot, in ways large and small.  But I also think the Lord can and does leave them to function and make decisions according to their informed and reasonably-exercised discretion.

Joseph Smith said: “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”  I think the Lord does that quite often.

In D&C 58 the Lord states:

We are told three times in the Doctrine & Covenants to "seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom."

Given these circumstances, I think the Lord often allows the decisions made by the Brethren to proceed and/or ratifies them, even if and when decisions resulting in a misstep or an adverse consequence.  I don't think the Lord will ever let the Brethren err to the point of leading the Church astray, but the historical record makes it pretty clear that he allows them to err in plenty of ways short of that.

And yet, we are still commanded to sustain and honor these men.  Not because of their perfection, but despite their manifest imperfections.  Hence with wisdom we see in Mormon 9:31:

And hence the caution we are given by the Lord in 3 Nephi 14:

Thanks,

-Smac

That's not really the issue here. What puzzles me is why they went out of their way to deny that public outcry had anything to do with the decision, revelation or not. Like I said before, it's not a big deal, but a wholly unnecessary denial. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Just now, Fair Dinkum said:

Good for them, it's what they should have done here.   They were honest and transparent in Erda. I was hoping that they would do the same here but instead chose to play the revelation card and claim the protests had no impact in their reversal.   It stretches incredulity.

It does stretch credulity.  However, you are playing the same game in reverse, expecting perfection from very ordinary people.  As I have pointed out repeatedly, LDS leaders are not trained theologians, and we must not expect them to be so.  We must not play this silly hyperbole game.

At the same time, they should be capable of taking honest criticism.  So I don't see them as victims of unfair criticism.

[CA Steve]

3 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It does stretch credulity.  However, you are playing the same game in reverse, expecting perfection from very ordinary people.  As I have pointed out repeatedly, LDS leaders are not trained theologians, and we must not expect them to be so.  We must not play this silly hyperbole game.

At the same time, they should be capable of taking honest criticism.  So I don't see them as victims of unfair criticism.

The problem here Robert is that these very ordinary people are claiming the imprimatur of revelation for this ordinary change of direction, so perhaps the hyperbole started with them.

[Robert F. Smith]

10 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

What exactly is in dispute?  In April of 2019 they announce the renovations and claim God's hand in directing them.  All He_ _ breaks out with protests, marches and petitions to the COB pleading for reconsideration of the path the church is taking which decision will result in the loss of much of what the Manti members loved about their temple and then in May 2021 the church reverses itself and claims revelation and Elder Rasband expects us to believe that none of the protests played into the reversal of their decision?  Sorry I'm not buying it.

God for you.  I share those historical architectural concerns, and am glad that the Brethren are humble enough to reverse themselves.  For you, on the other hand, it is more evidence of their incompetence and chicanery.  You are incapable of being charitable and understanding of the limitations of those Brethren.  So you foist false doctrine on the LDS Church in order indicate ignorance and mendacity on their part.  Is that the kind of society you want to be a part of?  A society in which the slightest little thing leads to catcalling?

[Robert F. Smith]

2 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

The problem here Robert is that these very ordinary people are claiming the imprimatur of revelation for this ordinary change of direction, so perhaps the hyperbole started with them.

It seems to me to be endemic to the LDS community, a community which eschews theological scholarship.  So perhaps such problems are predictable and unavoidable.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

That's not really the issue here. What puzzles me is why they went out of their way to deny that public outcry had anything to do with the decision, revelation or not. Like I said before, it's not a big deal, but a wholly unnecessary denial. 

True.  However, for FairDinkum it is a very big deal and indicative of lying leaders, and he will give no quarter to them.  If the Tanners were similarly marketing half-truths, they would not be expected to know the difference. Why is being charitable only applicable to one side of the issue?

[CV75]

On 5/4/2021 at 10:22 PM, Fair Dinkum said:

I was happy to hear that a new temple has been announced for Ephraim Utah what I was not excited to hear was that the church is calling it revelation. 

i wish the church would just be honest and transparent and say, we listened to the plea’s of the Manti saints and have decided that they are right, we should not destroy those beautiful unique paintings and have decided instead to build a new temple in Ephraim. But instead they make the ridiculous claim of revelation and deny they caved to public pressure. 

Add this to the ever growing list of other situations where the church had revelations To abandon polygamy, reverse the priesthood ban, reverse the October ban of children of lgbtq, expanding the roll of women, following public pressure to do so. 

Does anyone seriously think Ephraim would be getting a new temple had the members not complained and questioned the initial revelation to destroy those paintings? i certainly don't 

Elder Rasband did mention a couple of things that indicate the Brethren listened to valid expressions of need in order to receive revelation, which is nothing short of ministering principle: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/05/01/breaking-treasured-manti/

1. “Every prayer, every letter, every call “is worth it to communicate what is important to all of us,” she said. “I am grateful for all of it.” He also said that “protests, petitions and phone calls — even a march in downtown Provo — opposing the art removal played no role in the decision to retain them.”

2. “The reversal was prompted, he said, “by the prayers of the people in this part of Utah.”

Jody Hansen (whoever that is and for what it's worth) also observed:

3. “the leaders listened.”

4. “…seeing so many artists speak up to try to help people understand the connection between spirituality and great art.”

This shows that it is not the negative, but the positive, counsel and council-like expressions of thought that contribute to the environment where “administrative” revelation is given: “Hansen, who was a temple worker at the Salt Lake Temple before it closed, has relished “seeing so many artists speak up to try to help people understand the connection between spirituality and great art.”

22 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

That's not really the issue here. What puzzles me is why they went out of their way to deny that public outcry had anything to do with the decision, revelation or not. Like I said before, it's not a big deal, but a wholly unnecessary denial. 

See comments above. The Brethren are exemplifying what works and what doesn't in receiving "administrative revelation." If people want to be litened to, and part of the revelatory process, then use the methods and attitudes that work.

Edited May 6, 2021 by CV75

[pogi]

55 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Since I've pontificated (hey, I'm Catholic, I have official permission to pontificate  ) on LDS vs. Catholic revelation before, I'll add my thoughts. I think the issue is that the word "revelation" has some pretty heavy connotations: visions, speaking to Jesus face-to-face, etc. Perhaps the word "inspiration" should be used more often? When I pray and am answered, I call it inspiration. God has inspired me to do or not do something that I have asked about. I wouldn't call this a revelation because of the big connotations of that word.

Would both sides of this debate be comfortable using the word inspiration to describe decisions that appear administrative rather than doctrinal?

Is there a difference between inspiration and revelation?

 

 

37 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and LDS people would do well to speak more cautiously about such matters.  When everything is a revelation or miracle, then nothing is a revelation or miracle.

I tend to feel that revelation and miracles should be seen as common.  
 

Revelation is “an expression of the mind of God for the instruction of the church.”  (William E. Vine, et al. Complete Expositiry Dictionary if Ild and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1986), 2:532.).   I think that well includes administrative instruction/direction.  Revelation is God unveiling his mind to his people,  I think that is a perfectly appropriate use in this context.
 

When we limit revelation to the grandiose visions etc., I think we take away from just how involved God is in revealing his mind and will to us in the details of our lives.   I feel that miracles and revelations should be common place in our life.  By so doing we acknowledge just how alive and active God is in directing us, his children.  There is definitely overlap in the words inspiration and revelation.  In fact, I would be hard pressed to verbalize any clear distinction.  
 

“His revelations range from the sublime to the mundane.” (T. Givens)

Edited May 6, 2021 by pogi