MustardSeed Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 11 minutes ago, bluebell said: I think that in the context of what Dario said, mustardseed’s reply was accurate. The implications of being told that you would need to takeoff all of your clothes (implication of nudity, which is false) so that every part of your body could be blessed (implication of the touching of *every* part of the body, which is also false) are not accurate representations of what happened in the temple a few years ago. Thank you for articulating this. I was feeling it but not speaking to it. 1
mfbukowski Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) 6 hours ago, Teancum said: Well as I have stated it seems knowing the characteristics and attributes of God was once the first principle of the LDS gospel. Yet it has been a moving target. If Brigham was wrong on Adam God then he taught a false god. That is a problem for a prophet at least according the the Bible. But it seems little matters in the Church on these things any more and the target keeps moving. Same with temple ordinances. Oh my gosh dude! Was George Washington the Father of our Nation? Is Disney World an actual world? Yes WE have created worlds without number- every person lives in his own, as this board proves. All of us are Fathers and Mothers of our own worlds, as the Bishop is the "father of the ward". Christ is the "father of our salvation". William James is father of psychology. SCIENCE IS NOT THE WAY TO PROVE OR CRITICIZE RELIGION. You know I love you as a friend and we have been over this nine million times!! Please don't take this as offense as others do, I mean it as fatherly "tough love" and you know that I hope. Quote People also ask What is William James known for in psychology? Why is William James the father of psychology? William James is considered the father of American psychology because he was the first one to recognize psychology as an independent discipline. At Harvard in America in 1875, James opened the first American Laboratory of Psychology. Also, the author wrote a book called Principles of Psychology published in 1890. Why is William James the father of American psychology? - Study.com https://homework.study.com › explanation › why-is-willia... Search for: Why is William James the father of psychology? Who is the father of psychology? Is William James the founder of psychology? What did James Olds contribution to psychology? What experiment is William James known for? Edited February 21, 2023 by mfbukowski
Dario_M Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 21 minutes ago, bluebell said: I think that in the context of what Dario said, mustardseed’s reply was accurate. The implications of being told that you would need to takeoff all of your clothes (implication of nudity, which is false) so that every part of your body could be blessed (implication of the touching of *every* part of the body, which is also false) are not accurate representations of what happened in the temple a few years ago. I also didn't know that for sure. Some ex mormon told me that.🤷♂️ But i realise now that he whas lying then. Nice to know.
mfbukowski Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 29 minutes ago, bluebell said: I think that in the context of what Dario said, mustardseed’s reply was accurate. The implications of being told that you would need to takeoff all of your clothes (implication of nudity, which is false) so that every part of your body could be blessed (implication of the touching of *every* part of the body, which is also false) are not accurate representations of what happened in the temple a few years ago. Absolutely correct. As a temple worker in those days, I performed those ordinances, and was trained in how to do them.
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Dario_M said: I also didn't know that for sure. Some ex mormon told me that.🤷♂️ But i realise now that he whas lying then. Nice to know. Wearing a two piece bathing suit and getting sunblock applied would be more immodest than what happened. It was a form of blessing, an anointing with a touch of consecrated oil where women did it for women and men for men. Some who had it done I have heard were uncomfortable because they were not properly prepared for it. I can imagine it could be very disorienting if it happened to you in your wedding day where you are already strung up about everything else and have been for days. I really wish I had been able to done the initiatory and my endowment a month earlier instead of doing both the endowment and wedding on the same day. It was very hard to pay attention for me. I don’t do parties well and that and all the guests at the open house later were weighing heavy on my mind when they should have been the last thing I was thinking of. I think I would have enjoyed the initiatory/anointing experience if I had. The endowment part itself was better because I could sit and watch for much of it. Edited February 21, 2023 by Calm 4
Rain Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 3 minutes ago, Calm said: Wearing a two piece bathing suit and getting sunblock applied would be more immodest than what happened. It was a form of blessing, an anointing where women did it for women and men for men. Some who had it done I have heard were uncomfortable because they were not properly prepared for it. I can imagine it could be very disorienting if it happened to you in your wedding day where you are already strung up about everything else and have been for days. I really wish I had been able to take out my endowment a month earlier instead of doing both the endowment and wedding on the same day. It was very hard to pay attention for me. I don’t do parties well and that and all the guests were weighing heavy on my mind when they should have been the last thing I was thinking of. I think I would have enjoyed the initiatory/anointing experience if I had. The endowment part itself was better because I could sit and watch for much of it. While this is true I do think that there were other reasons people were uncomfortable with it as well.
carbon dioxide Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, mfbukowski said: Oh my gosh dude! Was George Washington the Father of our Nation? Is Disney World an actual world? Yes WE have created worlds without number- every person lives in his own, as this board proves. All of us are Fathers and Mothers of our own worlds, as the Bishop is the "father of the ward". Christ is the "father of our salvation". William James is father of psychology. Adam does seem to be used as a title beyond just a personal name. I am sure God does not call the first man of every world that he has put mankind on (billions of them) by the name of Adam because God likes the name and it sounds cool to him. Calling God the Father, Jesus Christ, Michael, and others by the name of Adam is not a problem. I think Brigham Young understood that the Father, Son, and Michael are different beings but he got careless by using the word Adam too loosely and caused massive confusion and God is not the author of confusion. Perhaps one way to help ease the confusion on this board is refer to all the male posters as Adam and all the female posters as Eve. Perhaps if that happens long enough, people will not get to worked up about calling God the Father Adam.
JLHPROF Posted February 21, 2023 Author Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Calm said: How about saying there is a ton of context missing? After all one can say you need to take your clothes off for both a strip joint and the doctors, but it means drastically different things. The vast majority of stuff I have read about nakedness in the temple is wrong, has been incorrect folktales. I am sincerely curious about the folktales you reference. I was under the impression that the initiatories in the 19th century involved bathtubs and no shields and the pouring of oil and water. Was I misinformed? I agree with the statements of modesty being preserved with shields. 1
Dario_M Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 30 minutes ago, Calm said: Wearing a two piece bathing suit and getting sunblock applied would be more immodest than what happened. It was a form of blessing, an anointing with a touch of consecrated oil where women did it for women and men for men. Men for men??? 🥰 30 minutes ago, Calm said: Some who had it done I have heard were uncomfortable because they were not properly prepared for it. I can imagine it could be very disorienting if it happened to you in your wedding day where you are already strung up about everything else and have been for days. Are we talking about the endowment now? Years ago? Why where some people uncomfortable with the endowment? 30 minutes ago, Calm said: I really wish I had been able to done the initiatory and my endowment a month earlier instead of doing both the endowment and wedding on the same day. Yeah..that must have been a bit much. Only the idea of doing both on the same day allready gives me stress if i think about it. A wedding and an endowment on the same day. Oh my oh my.....🎭 30 minutes ago, Calm said: It was very hard to pay attention for me. I don’t do parties well and that and all the guests at the open house later were weighing heavy on my mind when they should have been the last thing I was thinking of. I think I would have enjoyed the initiatory/anointing experience if I had. The endowment part itself was better because I could sit and watch for much of it. Yeah i also heard that you watch some kind of movie with the endowment? And later on you met again with your family who are waiting for you in another room or so? It sounds so complicated. I also have heard that after the endowment you actually may not tell other people about that experience because it is a bit of a secret or so? Correct me if i'm wrong.
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 36 minutes ago, Rain said: While this is true I do think that there were other reasons people were uncomfortable with it as well. I am being overly broad, you are right. 1
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 minute ago, Dario_M said: Are we talking about the endowment now? Years ago? Why where some people uncomfortable with the endowment? There is a blessing that takes place before the endowment. I get sloppy and refer to them both as the endowment because when you do them for yourself, they are done together. But the blessing that is being discussed is better referred to as the initiatory. There are other reasons people are uncomfortable with the endowment. Some are very understandable. Some could be helped by teaching how what is being taught relates to other things we are do and are taught in the church. Some things that made people uncomfortable have been changed.
bluebell Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, mfbukowski said: Oddly, many "scientific discoveries" in new fish species are actually found in fish markets where the species has been sold for generations. https://www.forbes.com/sites/melissacristinamarquez/2019/01/28/new-species-of-shark-found-in-fish-market/?sh=2b097874741d Time again to hit up good old Rorty again. We EXPERIENCE through our human senses, as human "mental states", or how things appear to us. Green and houses are human mental states as we know them. But we do not EXPERIENCE the CAUSES of those perceptions. One of a scientific bent would say that color for example is "caused" by wavelengths of light being filtered through the brain/mind/spirit. But we do not perceive wave lengths, we experience colors. It's a little easier to find an apple in a tree if one can see "red" rather than a swarm of wavelengths all mixed and mashed together. We need colors to find nuts and fruits and berries to survive, we don't need to see "wavelengths"- that concept doesn't even make sense to us! Yet again- Rorty- the simplest statement I have ever found of the principle here discussed. " No sentences= no truth. Not possible. What is a "true apple"? or even a "true church" exempting it's sentences or beliefs? Does that mean it's walls are "truly" 90 degrees square? The sentences can be shown as being "true" as per Alma 32- causing those sentences to be "sweet" and give comfort to our hearts. The walls are "square" providing strength to the structure, and sometimes therefore called "true". But without sentences and beliefs, there is NOTHING that one can say "verifies" the church beliefs. They logically fit together as a paradigm AND most importantly, the spirit or "conscience" verifies that they make sense and are right. THAT is what we mean by "I know the church is true". What it means is that believing in the church's beliefs, and following the Covenant path, the voice within me tells me I am on the right path, and in the process the path and paradigm become "sweet" to us. It's not about scientific "facts", it's about how there is "proof in the pudding" of what happens as we truly live the true church. Orthopraxy, not Orthodoxy. "Come and See". I'm not a follower of Rorty, so his reasoning on this doesn't sway me. I can see how he came to his conclusions, but I don't agree with them.
Grug the Neanderthal Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) 6 hours ago, pogi said: If you were humble and open enough, you may actually learn to treat your wife with the respect and dignity that she deserves as an equal partner rather than a subservient and subordinate subject to you. We have all read your threads though, so I don’t think anyone is holding their breath. 6 hours ago, pogi said: I have read your views on women and their place in the home. 5 hours ago, pogi said: I don’t think he is married from what I can tell. I told him before that I suspected that he wasn’t based on some of his comments and asked him directly if he was married. He avoided the question, leading me to believe he is not. But I could be wrong. 5 hours ago, pogi said: If he is married, he may be as good a husband he can be under such views, but I feel his wife would benefit from a more respectful view of women. Not that it's any of your business Pogi, but I am happily married and I treat my wife with the utmost respect as an equal partner. Your insinuations and insults that I either don't respect my wife and consider her to be an equal partner or that am not married simply because I don't share your worldview are beyond childish. Your unjustified attacks on my character completely cross the line. You should be ashamed of yourself. Do yourself a favor and stick to your promise to ghost me from now on, because I have nothing more to say to you. Edited February 21, 2023 by Grug the Neanderthal
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Dario_M said: Yeah i also heard that you watch some kind of movie with the endowment? And later on you met again with your family who are waiting for you in another room or so? It sounds so complicated. I also have heard that after the endowment you actually may not tell other people about that experience because it is a bit of a secret or so? Correct me if i'm wrong. We have been trained by church culture (it is not official but what we members tell each other we should do) over the years to talk about what happens in the temple very rarely. There are some parts we do commit not to share as a way, imo, to keep the experience a very sacred one. Just as you might not want to share a very favorite experience with others but want to keep it just for yourself as a way to keep it very special. Edited February 21, 2023 by Calm
Tacenda Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Dario_M said: I also didn't know that for sure. Some ex mormon told me that.🤷♂️ But i realise now that he whas lying then. Nice to know. Often there's more to those exmormon stories, haha. Meaning more explanation.
bluebell Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, pogi said: True in what sense? This seems to be the positivist view that you are stating, along the lines of the correspondence theory of truth. Because we can't escape our perspectives, truth (as it relates to us) is however we perceive it to be - aka "relative". One can state that it exists independent of the mind, but if they can't see it as it is or demonstrate it, then their statement of truth is unavoidably relative. One can't escape relativism without an absolute perspective, until then, we are limited to relative truth that we create. If we believe something is true that is false in the absolute sense - it is still truth in every practical sense to us. Relative truth has gravity and real consequence just like anything else that is real. All belief and truth as it relates to mortals is "separate from that thing" (because we can't see it as it is), so to speak of truth as if it correlates to something absolute is as you say, "beyond mortal comprehension", and cannot be posited as an absolute fact. It can only be stated in a relative way as a matter of belief/faith. If you agree, as you seem to, that knowledge is relative (epistemic relativism), than mankind has no truth in the absolute sense as defined by scripture - "truth is knowledge of things as they are..." We rely on relative truth if we rely on epistemic relativism. Relative truth is our truth, because we can't escape our perspective and know things as they are. So if we are going to speak of truth in any meaningful way, it must be relative, otherwise it is unknown. I am also guessing that we are not seeing eye to eye on what "truth" even means, which makes communication difficult. I get what you are saying; you are making the argument that perception is reality. And it is....in a certain context. Our disagreement is not because I don't understand you. I'm just coming from a different context than the one you keep repeating. Though perception may be reality, it can still be false. That means that truth was independent from perception the whole time. 1
Dario_M Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 13 minutes ago, Calm said: There is a blessing that takes place before the endowment. I get sloppy and refer to them both as the endowment because when you do them for yourself, they are done together. But the blessing that is being discussed is better referred to as the initiatory. There are other reasons people are uncomfortable with the endowment. Some are very understandable. Some could be helped by teaching how what is being taught relates to other things we are do and are taught in the church. Some things that made people uncomfortable have been changed. Maybe the differend handshakes that people need to learn can also make some uncomfortable as well. 🤝
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 Dario, you may have been pointed to this already, but it is a basic explanation that is written better than I can do…I always include too much detail and get sidetracked. Start with this. I am hoping I can find additional info from the Church as they generally do a good job of explaining when they choose to explain something. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/temples/what-is-temple-endowment?lang=eng 1
Dario_M Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 10 minutes ago, Calm said: We have been trained by church culture (it is not official but what we members tell each other we should do) over the years to talk about what happens in the temple very rarely. There are some parts we do commit not to share as a way, imo, to keep the experience a very sacred one. Just as you might not want to share a very favorite experience with others but want to keep it just for yourself as a way to keep it very special. But do you guys also get the instruction to keep that info for yourself after the endowment is done? Or is it more that you may decide that for yourself? I don't know why but i'm kinda curious. Allthough i don't wanna receive the endowment for myself i do wanna learn a bit about that stuff.
Calm Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 (edited) Here are some videos on it…am in the process of adding stuff, so check back to be sure you got them all. Edited February 21, 2023 by Calm 2
Dario_M Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 13 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Often there's more to those exmormon stories, haha. Meaning more explanation. Those Ex Mormons are sometimes super annoying because they wanna spread lies about the church to make the church look bad. I just can not stand that because it makes it difficult to know what to believe and what to not believe. 2
mfbukowski Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Calm said: Wearing a two piece bathing suit and getting sunblock applied would be more immodest than what happened. It was a form of blessing, an anointing with a touch of consecrated oil where women did it for women and men for men. Some who had it done I have heard were uncomfortable because they were not properly prepared for it. I can imagine it could be very disorienting if it happened to you in your wedding day where you are already strung up about everything else and have been for days. I really wish I had been able to done the initiatory and my endowment a month earlier instead of doing both the endowment and wedding on the same day. It was very hard to pay attention for me. I don’t do parties well and that and all the guests at the open house later were weighing heavy on my mind when they should have been the last thing I was thinking of. I think I would have enjoyed the initiatory/anointing experience if I had. The endowment part itself was better because I could sit and watch for much of it. And there are so many nuances in the blessings. Now, if you listen carefully those nuances are repeated in the first minutes of the introduction to the presentation of the endowment,or at least they were the last time I attended an endowment- LA temple has been closed for 2 weeks- renovations- I believe in screens and sound, I suspect, but I will go sometime next week and hear the new new presentation then. The endowment itself doesn't change- the blessing to be able to become like God for both sexes- but the presentation simply varies for the times.
mfbukowski Posted February 21, 2023 Posted February 21, 2023 10 minutes ago, Dario_M said: Those Ex Mormons are sometimes super annoying because they wanna spread lies about the church to make the church look bad. I just can not stand that because it makes it difficult to know what to believe and what to not believe. You are right- we must consider the source always, and the motivation of the speaker, as you suggest here. It's not hard to figure out what side they are on!
Recommended Posts