Will the Church Purchase the Kirtland Temple?

[HappyJackWagon]

2 minutes ago, rongo said:

We got to talk to one of the Hedrickite apostles (Church of Christ - Temple Lot actually owns the temple lot with the cornerstones). They are dying out as a church (aging out), and underwent a bitter legal battle with the RLDS Church in the early 80s for the temple lot. He expressed gratitude for the Church helping them rebuild their church building when it was destroyed in a fire, and I got the impression from him that when the time comes, they will be more than happy to sell us the actual temple lot. I think (hope) we would raze the "Tin Man" CoC temple to the ground if/when we ever bought it. 

I don't think there is any animosity towards us from CoC any more, and I don't think they care at all about any Joseph Smith legacies. Selling the printer's manuscript to the Church is very telling.

As far as the Kirtland temple, have any of you had a tour? The CoC missionaries strenuously avoid talking at all about the D&C 110 stuff --- they focus on architecture and trivia. 

Kind of like every LDS tour in Nauvoo or the Lion House etc avoiding any talk of plural marriage. Or Carthage Jail missionaries failing to mention or even rebuffing the idea that the prisoners were armed.

All of those tours are quite basic and trivial.

[Analytics]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The shallow, unsophisticated belief in young-earth creationism is not actually an LDS theological claim at all, and biblical scholars do not see the Genesis Garden of Eden Story as anything other than part of "a temple story" (so Anglican Bishop Tom Wright, PhD), same as the temple stories which LDS endowment participants regularly engage in, and for the same reason.  Yokels read the Genesis origins text as though it were a geological text or historical narrative, but yokels is as yokels does.  The text is obviously liturgical in nature, and in no way contradicts hominids coming out of Africa. 

Of course. But if a Latter-day Saint goes to college and signs up for Religion 324-325 in Institute to help him gain understanding of the historical background and meaning of the revelations recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, he will be taught the following:

The Prophet Joseph Smith identified northern Missouri as the location of Adam-ondi-Ahman, the place where Adam and Eve dwelt after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden (see D&C 116; see also commentary for Doctrine and Covenants 116 in this manual). According to the Prophet, the word Ahman is the name of God in the pure language of Adam, and “Son Ahman” is the name of the Son of God, Jesus Christ (see The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 2: July 1831–January 1833, ed. Matthew C. Godfrey and others [2013], 213–15; see also D&C 95:17). Adam-ondi-Ahman was the scene of a sacred council held by Adam with his righteous posterity (see D&C 107:53–57; see also commentary for Doctrine and Covenants 107 in this manual). This site will also be the location of the great future meeting between the Lord, Adam, and Adam’s righteous posterity before the Savior’s Second Coming (see Daniel 7:9–10, 13–14; D&C 27:5–14; 116).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-29-doctrine-and-covenants-77-80?lang=eng

What do you make of this? Was Adam a real historical person as the D&C and Institute program teach? If so, did he live near Spring Hill Missouri after he was cast out of the Garden of Eden? If so, what is the relationship between the historical Adam and his righteous prosperity who lived near Spring Hill Missouri, and the rest of the human family?

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You might want to ask the obvious about the fact that all BYU professors of biology are evolutionary biologists.

In contrast, ask the obvious question about what BYU professors of religion believe. Historically, BYU professors of religion were young-earth creationists. Professor Donald W. Parry, for example, is a sophisticated professor of Asian and Near Eastern Languages. He reads the Bible in the original Hebrew and spends his spare time in endeavors such as translating the Dead Sea Scrolls. He said in the Ensign:

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.

 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng 

Granted, that was 25 years ago. My point is that the Church is deemphasizing doctrines like that to make space for the naïve members who still think that way and the more sophisticated ones who simply cannot.

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 As to the claim of the universal Flood, there is no reason why the literary account in Genesis need be interpreted as other than a regional Flood.  Some evangelical yokels read it as a geology or science text, which is to miss the  point entirely -- which evangelicals and some poorly educated Mormons frequently do.

You mean evangelicals, highly educated Mormons such as Professor Donald Parry, and the multiple testimonies of God's prophets.

Mormons need a universal flood to get the posterity of Adam out of Missouri and back to the Old World.

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Your wild speculation about the purpose of LDS Church investments is uncalled for, but it is interesting to see you admitting that the global Flood nonsense is not required as a matter of Mormon belief.

Yes, the flood is nonsense and yes, Mormons are free to believe whatever they want.

I just happen to believe the Church will avoid drawing attention to what it has historically taught about the relationship between the historical Adam and Missouri, and because of that, it isn't going to develop real estate in Jackson County Missouri in a big way that creates the appearance that they think Jesus is going to return soon. They could, I just don't think they will.

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It is not necessary to be crass about it.  We need to be respectful of such beliefs, just as we are of the Jewish belief that they will someday build a temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem -- even though that Mount is under the control of the Muslims at this time.

That's my point. People can believe whatever they want, but if the Church wants to avoid being ridiculed this way, they will continue to lie relatively low in Jackson County and keep the idea of New Jerusalem as a hypothetical thing that will happen in the future, not something that they are actively constructing.

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The CofC has been losing members and facing financial problems for years now, and they have been selling things off to the LDS Church all that time.  That will continue.

True. If and when the CofC goes bankrupt and the LDS Church finds itself the owner of the CofC temple, I can't imagine them taking it down with a wrecking ball, and I can't imagine them retrofitting it for an LDS-style temple. They'll lease it to the city to use as a museum or something.  Just a guess.

[rongo]

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

What do you make of this? Was Adam a real historical person as the D&C and Institute program teach? If so, did he live near Spring Hill Missouri after he was cast out of the Garden of Eden? If so, what is the relationship between the historical Adam and his righteous prosperity who lived near Spring Hill Missouri, and the rest of the human family?

I think the vast majority of active members believe Adam was a real historical person (and that all humans are descended from a historical Adam and Eve), and everything associated with Adam-ondi-Ahman, etc. I think the "nuanced" sophisticates who believe Adam and Eve are mythical are a minority. 

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

Mormons need a universal flood to get the posterity of Adam out of Missouri and back to the Old World.

Agreed. Except when they believe that it's all a myth, but that the scriptures are still inspiring, anyway. I don't see how they get there, myself.

3 hours ago, Analytics said:

People can believe whatever they want, but if the Church wants to avoid being ridiculed this way, they will continue to lie relatively low in Jackson County and keep the idea of New Jerusalem as a hypothetical thing that will happen in the future . . .

I think that most (as in, a very large percentage) of the Brethren believe in these types of things, but as you mention, it has been a very l-o-n-g time since anyone has discussed Garden of Eden/Missouri, Adam-ondi-Ahman, the Flood, etc.

I don't mind being ridiculed for literal belief, and I hope that doesn't drive decisions from the institutional church. 

[mgy401]

18 hours ago, Analytics said:

I think those beliefs are perceived as being hypothetical in nature, contrary to science, and unnecessary for salvation. The belief in a literal Garden of Eden in Missouri is compatible with young-earth creationism and a universal-flood, but isn't the least bit compatible with mainstream science that says humans came out of Africa about 200,000 years ago. Jesus coming down out of the sky and setting up a worldwide government with Independence as the capital city is just as hypothetical and embarrassing as the belief that Ensign Peak Advisors is in fact saving up cash for that specific event. I think the Church will continue to treat these beliefs just as it treats the belief in the global flood--past prophets taught it and current prophets don't disavow it--but they don't emphasize it and don't require belief in it for full fellowship. 

I'm sure when Jesus personally tells the First Presidency and Presiding Bishopric that they should build a grand temple and Jesus' palace in Independence they will do so. Until then, they'll invest in office space in major cities, in agriculture, and in the stock market.

If the CoC got in a real financial bind and went to Salt Lake City with their hat in their hand and put their temple on the negotiating table do you know what LDS Inc. would do? I predict they would purchase the CoC temple and surrounding real estate, but would then lease it back to the CoC. The LDS Church isn't going to convert the CoC temple to an LDS one, and they aren't going to tear it down to build their own temple. No way.

It is perhaps worth noting that within Mormonism, the word “temple” in the 1830s denoted something very different than the meaning it took on once the Nauvoo Endowment was instituted.  IIRC the original plat for the city of Zion contemplated twelve “temples”, and at that time “temple” was sort of a catch-all definition for a building that was owned by the Church and dedicated to the advancement of its work.  Under that definition, all the buildings on Salt Lake City’s Temple Square are “temples”—the Tabernacle, the Assembly Hall, the COB, the CAB, the Relief Society Building, the Family History Library, the Church History Museum, the Church History Library, the Beehive and Lion Houses, visitors’ centers, the maintenance sheds and parking structure—to some degree they’re all “temples”, as Joseph Smith would have used and understood the word.  So, too, the structures on Welfare Square; and the structures down south in Provo on the campuses of BYU and the MTC.

My point to all this is that there are a lot of ways the Church could develop the Independence temple property in ways that might substantially satisfy Joseph Smith’s vision for the site but without accommodating any of the rituals we are used to describing as “temple work” and perhaps with much more public (ie non-Mormon) access to most of the structures on-site than we are used to associating with “temples”.

Edited September 24, 2021 by mgy401

[bOObOO]

7 minutes ago, mgy401 said:

It is perhaps worth noting that within Mormonism, the word “temple” in the 1830s denoted something very different than the meaning it took on once the Nauvoo Endowment was instituted.  IIRC the original plat for the city of Zion contemplated twelve “temples”, and at that time “temple” was sort of a catch-all definition for a building that was owned by the Church and dedicated to the advancement of its work.  Under that definition, all the buildings on Salt Lake City’s Temple Square are “temples”—the Tabernacle, the Assembly Hall, the COB, the CAB, the Relief Society Building, the Family History Library, the Church History Museum, the Church History Library, the Beehive and Lion Houses, visitors’ centers, the maintenance sheds and parking structure—to some degree they’re all “temples”, as Joseph Smith would have used and understood the word.  So, too, the structures on Welfare Square; and the structures down south in Provo on the campuses of BYU and the MTC.

My point to all this is that there are a lot of ways the Church could develop the Independence temple property in ways that might substantially satisfy Joseph Smith’s vision for the site but without accommodating any of the rituals we are used to describing as “temple work” and perhaps with much more public (ie non-Mormon) access to most of the structures on-site than we are used to associating with “temples”.

Yes, and add to that idea the idea that Zion refers to people who are pure in heart and not necessarily a place or a building in the conventional sense.  So Zion has already been established and was established long ago, including what happened in Kirtland, Independence, Nauvoo, Far West, Winter Quarters, Salt Lake City, etc considering how it is still being established and built up all over the world.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, mgy401 said:

It is perhaps worth noting that within Mormonism, the word “temple” in the 1830s denoted something very different than the meaning it took on once the Nauvoo Endowment was instituted.  IIRC the original plat for the city of Zion contemplated twelve “temples”, and at that time “temple” was sort of a catch-all definition for a building that was owned by the Church and dedicated to the advancement of its work.  Under that definition, all the buildings on Salt Lake City’s Temple Square are “temples”—the Tabernacle, the Assembly Hall, the COB, the CAB, the Relief Society Building, the Family History Library, the Church History Museum, the Church History Library, the Beehive and Lion Houses, visitors’ centers, the maintenance sheds and parking structure—to some degree they’re all “temples”, as Joseph Smith would have used and understood the word.  So, too, the structures on Welfare Square; and the structures down south in Provo on the campuses of BYU and the MTC.

My point to all this is that there are a lot of ways the Church could develop the Independence temple property in ways that might substantially satisfy Joseph Smith’s vision for the site but without accommodating any of the rituals we are used to describing as “temple work” and perhaps with much more public (ie non-Mormon) access to most of the structures on-site than we are used to associating with “temples”.

Excellent points!

I recall an earlier comment from someone hoping that the CoC temple is razed. I don't think so. It is a very interesting building in its own right and functions as an administration building. It could easily be used by the church if it were to be purchased.

[Boanerges]

23 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Not so much, I don't think.  I'm open to correction, but from where I stand, I cannot see how the Community of Christ would have any special attachment to the Book of Mormon.  More or less, doesn't its members view the book as inspired fiction?  If so, I can see, rather plainly, how the manuscript would be more important to Latter-day Saints than to members of the Community of Christ.

For something they didn't care much about, they held on to it for a long time and sold it for a pretty penny.

[Boanerges]

On 9/23/2021 at 5:39 PM, smac97 said:

I could envision an arrangement where the Church buys the temple property and then leases it back to the COC.  I don't think the Church would be interested in managing the COC temple.

Thanks,

-Smac

Sorry, I was referring to the Kirtland Temple. Perhaps that wasn't clear.

[Robert F. Smith]

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

Of course. But if a Latter-day Saint goes to college and signs up for Religion 324-325 in Institute to help him gain understanding of the historical background and meaning of the revelations recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants, he will be taught the following:

The Prophet Joseph Smith identified northern Missouri as the location of Adam-ondi-Ahman, the place where Adam and Eve dwelt after they were cast out of the Garden of Eden (see D&C 116; see also commentary for Doctrine and Covenants 116 in this manual). According to the Prophet, the word Ahman is the name of God in the pure language of Adam, and “Son Ahman” is the name of the Son of God, Jesus Christ (see The Joseph Smith Papers, Documents, Volume 2: July 1831–January 1833, ed. Matthew C. Godfrey and others [2013], 213–15; see also D&C 95:17). Adam-ondi-Ahman was the scene of a sacred council held by Adam with his righteous posterity (see D&C 107:53–57; see also commentary for Doctrine and Covenants 107 in this manual). This site will also be the location of the great future meeting between the Lord, Adam, and Adam’s righteous posterity before the Savior’s Second Coming (see Daniel 7:9–10, 13–14; D&C 27:5–14; 116).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual-2017/chapter-29-doctrine-and-covenants-77-80?lang=eng

What do you make of this? Was Adam a real historical person as the D&C and Institute program teach? If so, did he live near Spring Hill Missouri after he was cast out of the Garden of Eden? If so, what is the relationship between the historical Adam and his righteous prosperity who lived near Spring Hill Missouri, and the rest of the human family?

I have no problem with a Garden of Eden in Missouri at one time, as long as we fully understand it as a temple site used for a special endowment liturgy which set off the first dispensation.  As you know, in the LDS endowment rite, 'adam "man," is a title and not the name of the person actually undergoing that rite.  Do you recall his original name?  That's right.  He was not called Adam at all, except during the endowment rite.  What are you and I called during that rite in an LDS endowment?  Right again.  I believe that you are starting to get it.  The Earth had already been in existence billions of years before that first endowment.  Some religion manuals have been written by various professors, who are certainly entitled to their evanescent opinions, but who are not necessarily the best source on such matters.

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

In contrast, ask the obvious question about what BYU professors of religion believe. Historically, BYU professors of religion were young-earth creationists. Professor Donald W. Parry, for example, is a sophisticated professor of Asian and Near Eastern Languages. He reads the Bible in the original Hebrew and spends his spare time in endeavors such as translating the Dead Sea Scrolls. He said in the Ensign:

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.

 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng 

I have met and like Don Parry, and often cite his work.  However, I can read Hebrew every bit as well as he can and I have been around a little longer than him.  Parry's fellow religion professor Hugh Nibley was not a young-earth creationist.  Indeed, being a creationst doesn't make any sense in an LDS context, since creationism assumes creation from nothing, whereas LDS theology argues for transmission of life by standard reproductive means and an organization of preexisting materials -- not creation ex nihilo.

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

Granted, that was 25 years ago. My point is that the Church is deemphasizing doctrines like that to make space for the naïve members who still think that way and the more sophisticated ones who simply cannot.

You mean evangelicals, highly educated Mormons such as Professor Donald Parry, and the multiple testimonies of God's prophets.

The leaders of the LDS Church have no training in biblical languages or theology, and there is no reason to believe that they are spoon-feeding a naive LDS population.  They seldom concern themselves with the  mysteries, instead preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  And, by the way, Don Parry is not the only well-educated Mormon.  They cover a broad spectrum of opinion.

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

Mormons need a universal flood to get the posterity of Adam out of Missouri and back to the Old World.

Yes, the flood is nonsense and yes, Mormons are free to believe whatever they want.

On the contrary, only a regional Flood is needed to get Noah and crew down the Missouri River and Great Mississippi to the Ocean and to the Middle East.

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

I just happen to believe the Church will avoid drawing attention to what it has historically taught about the relationship between the historical Adam and Missouri, and because of that, it isn't going to develop real estate in Jackson County Missouri in a big way that creates the appearance that they think Jesus is going to return soon. They could, I just don't think they will.

That's my point. People can believe whatever they want, but if the Church wants to avoid being ridiculed this way, they will continue to lie relatively low in Jackson County and keep the idea of New Jerusalem as a hypothetical thing that will happen in the future, not something that they are actively constructing.

You might want to read Isaiah 2:1-5, as well, since the Jews will play a central role:

The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

O house of Jacob, come ye, and let us walk in the light of the Lord.

10 hours ago, Analytics said:

True. If and when the CofC goes bankrupt and the LDS Church finds itself the owner of the CofC temple, I can't imagine them taking it down with a wrecking ball, and I can't imagine them retrofitting it for an LDS-style temple. They'll lease it to the city to use as a museum or something.  Just a guess.

It won't come to that.  The CofC will continue to exist in some form, especially with all the money they will have gotten by selling items off to the LDS Church.

[rpn]

I think it is much more likely that the Community of Christ will sell the Kirtland Temple now that the man who was the main person in charge of the temple for years died last year.

[Esrom]

8 hours ago, rongo said:

I think the vast majority of active members believe Adam was a real historical person (and that all humans are descended from a historical Adam and Eve), and everything associated with Adam-ondi-Ahman, etc. I think the "nuanced" sophisticates who believe Adam and Eve are mythical are a minority. 

Agreed. Except when they believe that it's all a myth, but that the scriptures are still inspiring, anyway. I don't see how they get there, myself.

I think that most (as in, a very large percentage) of the Brethren believe in these types of things, but as you mention, it has been a very l-o-n-g time since anyone has discussed Garden of Eden/Missouri, Adam-ondi-Ahman, the Flood, etc.

I don't mind being ridiculed for literal belief, and I hope that doesn't drive decisions from the institutional church. 

I think the LDS church is approaching a schism, similar to what happened when the progressive wing of the RLDS church embraced women having priesthood and other liberal ideas, morphed into CoC while the more traditional/literal believers (similar to the pejoratively termed "yokels" by a poster on this thread) splintered into smaller factions.  It's been asserted that various BYU academics and folks like the Givens' have been leading the LDS progressive element.  The top leadership seem to be quiet literalists, best I can surmise.   There may not be an organizational schism ahead but all the moving parts are certainly there.

Edited September 25, 2021 by Esrom
misspelling

[Kenngo1969]

23 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

... Or Carthage Jail missionaries failing to mention or even rebuffing the idea that the prisoners were armed.

All of those tours are quite basic and trivial.

Who cares?  It was hardly a fair fight.  But you can take that up with Brother Joseph when you see him.  (Oh, how I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation!)  

[rongo]

11 hours ago, Esrom said:

I think the LDS church is approaching a schism, similar to what happened when the progressive wing of the RLDS church embraced women having priesthood and other liberal ideas, morphed into CoC while the more traditional/literal believers (similar to the pejoratively termed "yokels" by a poster on this thread) splintered into smaller factions. 

I think the traditionalist faction in this scenario would be the largest one. 

11 hours ago, Esrom said:

It's been asserted that various BYU academics and folks like the Givens' have been leading the LDS progressive element.  

I really don't care for the Givens and their brand of "why to stay in the boat" and "how to avoid problems with nuance." 

11 hours ago, Esrom said:

The top leadership seem to be quiet literalists, best I can surmise.   

Thank goodness for that! Hopefully it can stay that way until we run out the clock.  

[Scott Lloyd]

23 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Kind of like every LDS tour in Nauvoo or the Lion House etc avoiding any talk of plural marriage. Or Carthage Jail missionaries failing to mention or even rebuffing the idea that the prisoners were armed.

All of those tours are quite basic and trivial.

I’ve visited the Carthage Jail historic site several times since the mid-1990s, and there was never any effort to hide or “rebuff” the fact that the prisoners were armed.
 

It’s kind of silly to think the Church would be trying to cover up the fact of them being armed when the very pistol that Joseph Smith used for defense when they were at the jail is on open display at the flagship Church History Museum in Salt Lake City and has been for many years. 

[Scott Lloyd]

38 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Who cares?  It was hardly a fair fight.  But you can take that up with Brother Joseph when you see him.  (Oh, how I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that conversation!)  

Yeah. I’ve never understood why critics think Joseph and Hyrum having been armed or the prisoners having put up a brave though futile defense is a thing we ought to be embarrassed about. 

[Kenngo1969]

On 9/23/2021 at 3:36 PM, Analytics said:

... It’s important to understand that Independence is a not-particularly-nice urban area in the Kansas City metro area. ...

That's OK.  Latter-day Saints have a long and storied history or turning Hellholes into something pretty nice.  

Edited September 25, 2021 by Kenngo1969

[blueglass]

28 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yeah. I’ve never understood why critics think Joseph and Hyrum having been armed or the prisoners having put up a brave though futile defense is a thing we ought to be embarrassed about. 

The Grey's scattered after raiding the jail.   Does anyone know why the nauvoo legion did not plan a counter attack?   

 

Edited September 25, 2021 by blueglass

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, blueglass said:

The Grey's scattered after raiding the jail.   Does anyone know why the nauvoo legion did not plan a counter attack?   

 

The Nauvoo Legion, like other town militias of the day, was commissioned by the state. In the midst of the tension surrounding the Nauvoo Expositor affair, the state-issued arms had been confiscated from the Nauvoo Legion by order of Illinois Gov. Thomas Ford under state authority. 
 

Moreover, the Nauvoo citizens, under direction from Church leaders, were anxious to be orderly and law abiding so as to leave their enemies without excuse for the violence and persecution inflicted upon them. 
 

[Scott Lloyd]

26 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

That's OK.  Latter-day Saints have a long and storied history or turning Hellholes into something pretty nice.  

I’ve been to Independence a number of times. Contrary to the impression implied by Analytics, Independence is no slum. Though not an urban citadel, it is a decent suburb.  

[blueglass]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The Nauvoo Legion, like other town militias of the day, was commissioned by the state. In the midst of the tension surrounding the Nauvoo Expositor affair, the state-issued arms had been confiscated from the Nauvoo Legion by order of Illinois Gov. Thomas Ford under state authority. 
 

Moreover, the Nauvoo citizens, under direction from Church leaders, were anxious to be orderly and law abiding so as to leave their enemies without excuse for the violence and persecution inflicted upon them. 
 

Grey's armed to the teeth, the Nauvoo legion stripped of weapons.  There is a travesty here.  

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, blueglass said:

Grey's armed to the teeth, the Nauvoo legion stripped of weapons.  There is a travesty here.  

Indeed. 

[mgy401]

2 hours ago, blueglass said:

Grey's armed to the teeth, the Nauvoo legion stripped of weapons.  There is a travesty here.  

Let us clarify, what was removed was *state issued* weapons.  The members were permitted to retain their personal firearms, which constituted the vast majority of the Nauvoo Legion’s Arsenal (and stands in contrast with Far West, where privately-owned guns were confiscated as part of the terms of surrender).

And of course, at Nauvoo, they still had John Browning turning out new guns stamped with the legend “Holiness to the Lord”.   

[esodije]

I think there are several factors in play, any combination of which could impact a theoretical sale of the Kirtland Temple and the Smith-family properties in Nauvoo to the COJCOLDS. One: the CofC’s level of interest in continuing to operate these sites as historical landmarks that stimulate interest in the CofC. Two: the sizable premium the CofC knows the. COJCOLDS would pay for the properties—holding constant, arguendo, such things as their perceived value in COJCLDS missionary work and JS’s level of veneration in the COJCOLDS. Three: the CofC’s future need for liquid assets. And four: the COJCOLDS’s own growing “left vs. right” rift in its membership and the implications it has for the church’s future growth or diminishment. The iron is still hot at this point for a transfer of ownership, but that may not always be the case.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/24/2021 at 9:12 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

Kind of like every LDS tour in Nauvoo or the Lion House etc avoiding any talk of plural marriage. 

The Lion House doesn’t have tours. It functions as a restaurant and a reception center. 
 

You’re probably thinking of the adjacent Beehive House, where tours are provided. But this newly opened exhibit and associated tour in the Beehive House obviously does reference plural marriage:

https://www.thechurchnews.com/history-revisited/2021-09-24/beehive-house-joseph-f-smith-julina-lambson-revelation-vision-redemption-of-the-dead-historic-site-226502

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, mgy401 said:

Let us clarify, what was removed was *state issued* weapons.  The members were permitted to retain their personal firearms, which constituted the vast majority of the Nauvoo Legion’s Arsenal (and stands in contrast with Far West, where privately-owned guns were confiscated as part of the terms of surrender).

And of course, at Nauvoo, they still had John Browning turning out new guns stamped with the legend “Holiness to the Lord”.   

I already said they were state-issued weapons. But it indicates that the Legion, as a state-commissioned militia, would not have been legally permitted to go out after the mobbers or the Carthage Grays, even if they had been of a mind to do so. The governor of the state was commander-in-chief of all state militias, just like today, when the governor has authority over a state’s National Guard unit, the contemporary equivalent of the town militias of yesteryear. 

Edited September 25, 2021 by Scott Lloyd