The bare minimum.

[Calm]

Probably it’s around the 53 minute mark if it is the one I have read about.  He claims JS said they were Jaredites.  Only it wasn’t JS.  And it has been known for a long time.

Quote

“[May 1, 1843:] I insert fac similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

“I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.” (Then followed a reprint of material from the Times and Seasons article.)

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”³

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1981/08/kinderhook-plates-brought-to-joseph-smith-appear-to-be-a-nineteenth-century-hoax?lang=eng

Edited August 26, 2022 by Calm

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

Seems like your kind of saying that if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it that it doesn't make a sound.

In your example if no one is there to feel the Spirit then it isn't present (is that a correct understanding of what you mean?).

 

No that isn't a correct understanding of what I mean. Since I fell several months ago, I often don't explain myself well. Sorry. What I am trying to say is that in this current dispensation the Holy Spirit is active on earth in convicting, comforting, teaching, and ministering to humans in their quest to know more of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit itself, and to live a Spirit-filled and led life.

I am suggesting that is the Spirit's role and the Spirit is "busy" in doing that. I do not believe the Spirit dwells (remains, abides, indwells) in empty buildings of whatever kind. There is not ministry for the Spirit to do in an empty building. The  Spirit is present, not because someone feels it, but because we have the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is a Spirit, not human. Christians are now its dwelling place. The Holy Spirit in this day and age does not reside in any structures as it may have in the first temple, in front of the tabernacle, etc. depending on one's understanding of the "glory of God" - the Shekinah Glory.  I think that we pray to the Father, in the Son's name and via the Holy Spirit. Hence there is no reason or purpose for the Holy Spirit to dwell, reside, remain, or stay in an empty building of whatever make or design. We feel the Spirit on Sunday morning in Sacrament or in any worship service in any church because Christians are there and the Spirit in them ministers to the Spirit in us. I hope that is clearer. You may very well not agree with what I am saying; my interest is that you understand what I am saying. That is my understanding of Stephen's sermon as recorded in Luke's gospel chapter 7. Thanks.

[ksfisher]

8 minutes ago, Navidad said:

No that isn't a correct understanding of what I mean. Since I fell several months ago, I often don't explain myself well. Sorry. What I am trying to say is that in this current dispensation the Holy Spirit is active on earth in convicting, comforting, teaching, and ministering to humans in their quest to know more of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit itself, and to live a Spirit-filled and led life.

I am suggesting that is the Spirit's role and the Spirit is "busy" in doing that. I do not believe the Spirit dwells (remains, abides, indwells) in empty buildings of whatever kind. There is not ministry for the Spirit to do in an empty building. The  Spirit is present, not because someone feels it, but because we have the promise of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is a Spirit, not human. Christians are now its dwelling place. The Holy Spirit in this day and age does not reside in any structures as it may have in the first temple, in front of the tabernacle, etc. depending on one's understanding of the "glory of God" - the Shekinah Glory.  I think that we pray to the Father, in the Son's name and via the Holy Spirit. Hence there is no reason or purpose for the Holy Spirit to dwell, reside, remain, or stay in an empty building of whatever make or design. We feel the Spirit on Sunday morning in Sacrament or in any worship service in any church because Christians are there and the Spirit in them ministers to the Spirit in us. I hope that is clearer. You may very well not agree with what I am saying; my interest is that you understand what I am saying. That is my understanding of Stephen's sermon as recorded in Luke's gospel chapter 7. Thanks.

I think those are some interesting things to think about. 

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I would. 

For what purpose?

[Stargazer]

On 8/25/2022 at 4:09 AM, Calm said:

A timeline of the development of the ban:

https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/blacks-and-priesthood-temple-ban-timeline/
 

https://doctrineandcovenantscentral.org/sections/commentary-on-od-2/?Verse-1

Not having followed this thread well enough, someone else may already have brought up Blacklatterdaysaints.org, or maybe not, but if not, here it is:

http://www.blacklatterdaysaints.org/

[Stargazer]

23 hours ago, Calm said:

As an open house kind of thing or for tourists to gawk at the worshippers or to seek a place to worship themselves?

Or even better, to demonstrate against what those darned Mormuns are getting up to...

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

We don’t have signs like that, but there are some pretty intimidating folks seated at the doorway.

Yes, I've served at the doorway of the London temple a number of time, checking recommends, and as Bernard and Mrs. Gui can both testify*, I am VERY intimidating!! 👹

 

* They having met both me and my wife.

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Maybe @Jerry Atric would be content if LDS meeting houses were more beautiful?

It wouldn't hurt, probably.

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Are there doctrinal/theological reasons for the plainness?

Nope. I think the primary concern is a balance between utility, cost, and attractiveness. 

Besides, you've seen how some people go ballistic because the church has more money than it supposedly needs. Imagine what would happen if we started making our meetinghouses architecturally splendiferous. We'd never hear the end of it.

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Catholic architecture (especially prior to the terrible implementations of the Second Vatican Council) involved doctrine and theology and was meant to teach -- the whole church is a symbol for the divine.

Which is all very lovely! Back in prior days, people would spend more money on their places of worship than they would spend on their own homes, the better to glorify God. Here in England most church buildings are Church of England, but in reality they are more Catholic than anything else (and of course they were Catholic once upon a time). Within 3 miles of my house are five beautiful stone churches (all CofE), and the newest of them is only 947 years old. Three of them were built originally by the Anglo-Saxons, and two by the Normans. And all five are still in use. Four of them have undergone a lot of maintenance and expansion over the centuries, but one is pretty much in the same floorprint it had when it was built, in 950 AD. The oldest of the five was built as a wooden structure in the early 700s AD (by Saint Cuthman), but at an unknown later date was rebuilt in stone. Imagine that! A thousand-year old church building!

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

For what purpose?

Aesthetics maybe. But maybe it's a way to get people to the temple.

[Bernard Gui]

27 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Aesthetics maybe. But maybe it's a way to get people to the temple.

My folks went to the temple when we were meeting in a WW2 army barracks. 🙂

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

Failure today is success tomorrow. 

As long as it isn’t fatal.

 

[Jerry Atric]

11 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

As long as it isn’t fatal.

 

You always wave goodbye to failure traveling the road to success. 

[Jerry Atric]

18 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Maybe @Jerry Atric would be content if LDS meeting houses were more beautiful?

LDS meeting houses are definitely fugly. The building we worship in has foundation block walls that look like they have been painted 10 times. The bottom four feet is a ruff jute type material that looks like it would be better suited to be a welcoming matt placed at a front door to remove mud from shoes. 

I've heard the reason our ward buildings are built the way they are is for ease of maintenance, especially during the second coming. It's not talked about a lot anymore, but we believe most of the world and the people in it are going to experience a horrible death. Back in the day,  Mormons believed and some still do, that everyone (Mormons) will meet at the ward building and make plans to ride out the calamities the rest of the world is experiencing because of their unrighteousness. The block wall interior with brick exterior will stop most bullets. The low roof pitch found on most ward buildings are walkable incase a defensive position needs to be taken from high ground. Also, most ward buildings are built stronger than local building code requirements to help with the storms and terrible weather we will experience in the last days.What I just explained to you is Mormonism before the internet. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Jerry Atric

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Jerry Atric said:

  I just explained to you is Mormonism before the internet. 

You know plenty of us have been alive long before the Internet made an appearance, so acting like some kind of authority while spouting stuff that maybe teenage boys*** like to babble about when bored in priesthood (in my experience the girls had better and worse things to do), but has nothing to do with actual doctrine or practice isn’t doing anything, but make you look like a troll. 

There is no need to appeal to the Second Coming given there have been plenty of reasons to try and keep costs down both for building and maintenance back when local Saints were footing the bill for chapels and then when the Church took over completely, but wasn’t in quite as sweet a position financially as they are now (and plenty of leaders around who still remembered the $32 million hole of debt the Church got into by building too much too big too fast due to Henry Moyle’s overly ambitious program).  The one size fits all minimalist approach helps avoid divisions between haves and have nots as well cuts down on design and building costs and makes the building easy to keep clean and since we now have volunteers doing it, that is a good thing. Having carpet up the side of the walls, as ugly as it is, cuts way down on noise and probably helps keep the halls a little bit warmer than full on brick would.

And I have heard all my life of chapels being used for shelter even in the US, but also internationally after earthquakes, floods, fires, snowstorms causing power outages, and hurricanes.  Chapels need to be sturdy for the here and now.  
 

The idea that chapels are built for defensive purposes ignores the ubiquitous Californian H style where if they started shooting out the windows, they would be shooting at each other for about half them plus at least doubles the area one had to protect (for some reason the H style was used for my Canadian ward and while it worked in balmy California as it was quite nice there to open the windows on a spring day in Sunday School, man, the Canadian version was one cold building midwinter) as well as the mass of windows and multiple entrances made of glass walls in all our chapels I have ever been in, which ‘walls’ provide no protection since bullets can tear through them easily and sail down those long straight hallways until they find a target.  There is no cover in the halls themselves (falling back would leave one completely open as you jumped from class to class and I bet there is a lot of ricocheting off of brick like that.  Any gun people here know?

***I can believe kids imagined how to turn chapels into fortresses because that is what kids do…I turned many a building into such myself, possibly even a church and I am not into war games or end of times, my mind just rambles a lot.  I have a hard time believing that kids after a moment’s thought would think chapels were actually made with having to be defended in mind. Sure the block would stop bullets, but glass doesn’t and there was nothing provided to block those off. It is laughable.  
 

1981 they switched to more energy efficient buildings, understandable after the 1973 and 1979 oil crises.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1981/11/news-of-the-church/a-new-generation-of-meetinghouses?lang=eng

 “According to Robert J. Little, manager of architectural services for the Building Division, the new generation of Church buildings “are designed to make form follow function.” With the consolidated meeting schedule, LDS meetinghouses will become generally smaller and more functional, thus more economical and flexible.

While the new designs will create a distinctive appearance, a sense of the traditional LDS building will be maintained by a tower built in front of the new meetinghouse. Little indicated that the new pole towers will be much less expensive than the block towers so typical of LDS meetinghouses.

Designers Lee Gray and Bruce Edwards said, “New chapel interiors will be attractive with more soft materials and less masonry, with eight-foot-high walls and wooden roof superstructure. All rooms in the buildings will be more flexible and oriented toward multipurpose use.””

Edited August 27, 2022 by Calm

[Jerry Atric]

37 minutes ago, Calm said:

You know plenty of us have been alive long before the Internet made an appearance, so acting like some kind of authority while spouting stuff that maybe teenage boys*** like to babble about when bored in priesthood (in my experience the girls had better and worse things to do), but has nothing to do with actual doctrine or practice isn’t doing anything, but make you look like a troll

Are you upset with how Mormonism viewed the world and its inhabitants before the millennium? Mormonism today is totally different than what it was pre-millennium. Pre-internet we used to worry how much food storage we could fit on a handcart before it became so heavy it wouldn't be able to be pushed/pulled on the long and treacherous trip to the promised land in Missouri. Pre-millenium, Mormons worried about which of their nonmormon friends would die a fiery death when the Lord returns. Now that we're 22 years post-doomsday, not really talked about anymore. 

 

57 minutes ago, Calm said:

I can believe kids imagined

Kids? No! Pre-Millennium, Mormon MEN and WOMEN would often talk about meeting up at the ward building and discuss food storage and how we would protect it. Back in the day, I remember telling members who didn't prepare, that food storage wouldn't be distributed fairly amongst the members just because they were able to make it to the church. That they needed to have their own food storage for their family. Food storage, water, ammo and weapons were huge topics before the millennium. And toilet paper! The further we get from the millennium, the less will prepare for doomsday.

 

1 hour ago, Calm said:

multipurpose use

Like what?

[Calm]

 

1 hour ago, Jerry Atric said:

Kids? No! Pre-Millennium, Mormon MEN and WOMEN would often talk about meeting up at the ward building and discuss food storage and how we would protect it. Back in the day, I remember telling members who didn't prepare, that food storage wouldn't be distributed fairly amongst the members just because they were able to make it to the church. That they needed to have their own food storage for their family. Food storage, water, ammo and weapons were huge topics before the millennium. And toilet paper! The further we get from the millennium, the less will prepare for doomsday.

Prior to the Millennium I was in over a dozen wards and branches, including 4 states, one province and Moscow and I never heard that conversation.  My parents built an insulated addition on to their garage to store wheat and other stuff.  My mom actually ground her own wheat and made her own bread.  My Canadian ward even had a giant wooden wheel on the wall where it would be turned each month to show what food storage/emergency prep item one should focus on that month even, no guns and ammo on it and as BYU students before that we would discuss ways to store food storage in our small apartments and of course, there were the community gardens in the fields next to Married Student housing back then where we used to grow a little garden each summer. We talked food storage, there was always at least a few enthusiasts in every congregation…but your version heard in the classes and halls of all those chapels on Sunday.  Nope.  Our conversations were more often about how we could encourage more to store food so that not only would they be prepare for when they got hit with illness or job loss they would have enough to get by until the tide turned back for them (and we heard plenty of testimonies providing good reason for making that effort across the pulpit and in our classes), but when we did venture into end times, the focus was typically on that we needed to work at getting members more committed so when we gathered as a people we would have enough among all of us to care for those who were not able to store enough for themselves.

Maybe in your locale there was that particular obsession or maybe it was just your obsession triggering all those conversations you heard.  Perhaps others can speak up if this was also their experience.

Are there end times obsessions among members in the Church, oh yes, and way too many of them that now go into the ‘store enough ammo to fight off the unwashed hordes sure to come’ (currently the most popular strand I have read about is antigovernment with hedge prophets sharing their alleged visions of a Democratic president declaring martial law or the North Koreans somehow having enough power to be invited by said corrupt government to help with controlling the rebellious citizens or they and the Russians somehow invade the US and completely destabilize it) and being past the Millennium hasn’t dissipated them, but it appears to have grown with the popularity of Visions of Glory and Rowe’s books plus conferences yearly.  There are people are making a ton of money ramping up fear and hatred and ultimately apostasy instead of helping create a Zion people.  I had a ward member come to me asking about it because she knew I was into apologetics and followed controversies in the church.  Another ward member was trying to convince her of the doom and gloom to come, but she did not see the Spirit in it at all and wanted to know if there was anything in it.  Thankfully I was able to reassure her the Church had come out against it.

The Church denounced Rowe’s stuff and had her on their spurious materials list barring teachers from using them for seminary and institute.

Now we have the great example of the self proclaimed prophet, now behind bars Chad Daybell demonstrating the worse of that obsession, though I have my doubts he is much of a true believer and instead with many, see it as a way to make money off his fellow Saints and get attention he couldn’t get any other way.

What I take issue with is your claim of end times gun toting enthusiasts as the semiofficial general Latter-day Saint attitude rather than always in the fringes and that it included this aggressive fantasy of our churches as armed fortress idea just because they were built with inexpensive, energy efficient blocks.

There are 30 years of church publications online with additional materials elsewhere.  No doubt you will be able to find some hint of this ever present discussion somewhere in there.  This is a CFR btw.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Calm

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

You always wave goodbye to failure traveling the road to success. 

Not always. 

[Bernard Gui]

4 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

LDS meeting houses are definitely fugly. The building we worship in has foundation block walls that look like they have been painted 10 times. The bottom four feet is a ruff jute type material that looks like it would be better suited to be a welcoming matt placed at a front door to remove mud from shoes. 

I've heard the reason our ward buildings are built the way they are is for ease of maintenance, especially during the second coming. It's not talked about a lot anymore, but we believe most of the world and the people in it are going to experience a horrible death. Back in the day,  Mormons believed and some still do, that everyone (Mormons) will meet at the ward building and make plans to ride out the calamities the rest of the world is experiencing because of their unrighteousness. The block wall interior with brick exterior will stop most bullets. The low roof pitch found on most ward buildings are walkable incase a defensive position needs to be taken from high ground. Also, most ward buildings are built stronger than local building code requirements to help with the storms and terrible weather we will experience in the last days.What I just explained to you is Mormonism before the internet. 

Back in what day? I’ve been involved in Mormonism for 75 years including the times when we built our own chapels and paid for them with bake sales and building assessments. What you describe does not match my experience at all. What about all the windows? Bulletproof glass? I’m not sure you are really LDS. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Jerry Atric said:

Like what?

Are you not that familiar with how members use and used church buildings after all that you have to ask?

Happened to come across this when looking for info on meetinghouse building plans. https://www.thisweekinmormons.com/2017/11/cookie-cutter-meeting-house-design-triumph/

Edited August 27, 2022 by Calm

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

My parents built an insulated addition on to their garage to store wheat and other stuff.  My mom actually ground her own wheat and made her own bread.  My Canadian ward even had a giant wooden wheel on the wall where it would be turned each month to show what food storage/emergency prep item one should focus on that month even, no guns and ammo on it

The guns and ammo slander was pushed by Ed Decker, Dave Hunt, and their minions to create fear and distrust back when they were doing their thing. But now that zombies are a threat, it might be prudent to put away some firepower. 

In fact, we were taught that our storage was intended to be shared with those who might not have enough. 

The chapels are not built for gunplay. I learned the hard way by breaking my collarbone in a laser tag battle between the Gui and the bishop’s families in the halls and gym. The stake president was not happy.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Bernard Gui

[Jerry Atric]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

My parents built an insulated addition on to their garage to store wheat and other stuff.  

Your parents built a n addition on their garage to store wheat? Didn't that cost thousands of dollars? What were they preparing for?

 

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

 Our conversations were more often about how we could encourage more to store food so that not only would they be prepare for when they got hit with illness or job loss

That was funny! I agree that the food storage conversation as of late has gravitated toward needing it for illness or job loss, but everyone knows the brethren didn't encourage storing food incase a family member gets the sniffles. In the 80s and 90s we were storing food because we were preparing for a world that was going to be cleansed with fire. You can't deny that. That's what Mormon is, preparing the world and it's inhabitants for a violent and deadly 2nd coming. If not, why do we have a missionary program? I'll tell you. Because we believe we're the only religion on earth with the ability to help our nonmember brothers and sisters return to live with God one day. No other religion can do that,  no other religious figure can do that. Unless im confused about what our main goal on earth is.

 

32 minutes ago, Calm said:

 but when we did venture into end times

Really? You're kinda blowing this "end times" thing off, almost acting like we're not first and foremost an end times religion. We're 100% about end times! Everything we do INCLUDING FOOD STORAGE  is for the end of days as we know it. 

 

38 minutes ago, Calm said:

What I take issue with is your claim of end times gun toting enthusiasts as the semiofficial general Latter-day Saint attitud

Is this your shtick? Because you keep trying to say I'm acting like I speak for the church. Do you not like posters writing about their personal opinions, especially if those opinions don't mesh with yours? You seem very defensive. 

 

43 minutes ago, Calm said:

There are 30 years of church publications online with additional materials elsewhere.  No doubt you will be able to find some hint of this ever present discussion somewhere in there.  This is a CFR btw.

What "ever present discussion?" Are you talking about the one I shared just now? You mean my personal experience as a Mormon? There's a large percentage of Mormons reading this that know exactly what I'm talking about. These are the Mormons that back in the day used to wish for the Danites to return to protect the church. They're  the missionaries that used to shake the dust from their feet when a potential convert didn't accept the gospel message. These are the Mormons that grew up believing drinking caffeinated soda pop was a sin. You want me to CFR my mormon experience?

[Jerry Atric]

35 minutes ago, Calm said:

Are you not that familiar with how members use and used church buildings after all that you have to ask?

I'm familiar. Our buildings are not used to their full potential. Not even close. Remember, we're trying to convert souls here.

Edited August 27, 2022 by Jerry Atric

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

The guns and ammo slander was pushed by Ed Decker, Dave Hunt,  and their minions to create fear and distrust back when they were a thing. In fact, we were taught that our storage was intended to be shared with those who might not have enough. 

Same here.  And I remember a couple of times members were asked to donate a part of their home storage to a family in need (I lived in areas that didn’t have Bishops’ Storehouses).

Edited August 27, 2022 by Calm

[webbles]

19 minutes ago, Jerry Atric said:

That was funny! I agree that the food storage conversation as of late has gravitated toward needing it for illness or job loss, but everyone knows the brethren didn't encourage storing food incase a family member gets the sniffles. In the 80s and 90s we were storing food because we were preparing for a world that was going to be cleansed with fire. You can't deny that. That's what Mormon is, preparing the world and it's inhabitants for a violent and deadly 2nd coming. If not, why do we have a missionary program? I'll tell you. Because we believe we're the only religion on earth with the ability to help our nonmember brothers and sisters return to live with God one day. No other religion can do that,  no other religious figure can do that. Unless im confused about what our main goal on earth is.

I think you might be confused.  The church has a three fold mission: proclaim the gospel, perfect the Saints, and redeem the dead.  Proclaiming the gospel is only one part.  It is not the main part.  In addition, I would say the vast majority of those who make it to the Celestial Kingdom will never have been members in their lifetime.

The reason we have a missionary program is because we've been commanded to share the gospel.  I expect most of the people that I spoke to on my mission to accept the gospel sometime before the final judgement.  Accepting the gospel and being baptized in life is not a requirement to reach the Celestial Kingdom.

[Jerry Atric]

8 minutes ago, webbles said:

Accepting the gospel and being baptized in life is not a requirement to reach the Celestial Kingdom.

If someone has been offered to accept the gospel and denied the gospel while here in earth, the Celestial Kingdom is no longer in play for them. Correct?