Nevada temple problem

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

My husband and I went on a getaway trip a few years ago first to Buffalo and drove to Palmyra and on to New York. I loved the area and being able to be where the whole Latter-day Saint religion began and seeing places I'd only read about. Funny I was more interested in the history of the church after my crisis of faith. We also went to Nauvoo later on. 

So you live in the Palmyra area? How cool!

Yes I live in Palmyra and am a member of the Palmyra NY ward and stake.  I often ride my bike past the Hill Cumorah and the Sacred Grove. They are only a few miles from me as the crow flies and not much further on the road.

[longview]

20 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Yes I live in Palmyra and am a member of the Palmyra NY ward and stake.  I often ride my bike past the Hill Cumorah and the Sacred Grove. They are only a few miles from me as the crow flies and not much further on the road.

Is it possible for you to locate the homesteads of various mobbers and persecutors? 

[Teancum]

On 4/23/2024 at 7:16 PM, Calm said:

from the above link…

An as noted this seems a new innovation. Where is the idea that the steeple is part of our religious observance taught? 

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, longview said:

Is it possible for you to locate the homesteads of various mobbers and persecutors? 

I am sure I could. ☺️

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

An as noted this seems a new innovation. Where is the idea that the steeple is part of our religious observance taught? 

In the guy’s head who is writing it.  My guess is he is following a template or ideas from some legal site, given “religious observance” is capitalized.  
 

I wonder if he asked an AI for writing ideas, lol

I hate signing up for things (my gut goes “just one more company taking advantage of me using my private info to make money”), so I have not used an AI for anything yet.  I need to get past that dislike and go for it.

ps:  apparently it is a woman who is the director of communications for the area and who sent out this email to the stakes, which was then sent to local members.

Edited April 26, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

Side comment….what is the easiest AI to use?  I need to grit my teeth and break the avoidance spell.  This is a painless topic to play with…well, almost.  The idea the height of a steeple is crucial to our religious expression is cringeworthy itself.  It is so bad I actually would like to see this confirmed as an actual request and not a gag/spoof by someone not appreciating the steeple/temple.

If I was a judge or council person or whoever judges the value of such arguments, I would tell them they had to get a flat roof as a penalty for being too creative in their argument.  I so hope there are no local saints who just assume this was something taught on the one day they missed in seminary, Institute, Primary, Sunday School, etc. and go ahead and include it in their support letters.  

If in 30 years there is a folk doctrine about the temples and chapels being in competition to have the tallest steeple, we at least will know where it started.

Edited April 25, 2024 by Calm

[blackstrap]

Not sure where I heard this but ChatGPT is inaccurate about 20% of the time and ,more concerning, will deny that it is wrong. Seems it has learned gaslighting is a human trait . 

[webbles]

On 4/24/2024 at 7:43 AM, Amulek said:

Has the statement been authenticated? I live in the temple district, and we haven't been asked to participate in an email campaign.

I have family in McKinney who can confirm they haven't received something like that either. They were told just last week, in a letter read over the pulpit from their Stake President, that there would be clipboards in the foyers this coming Sunday for people to sign if they wanted to participate a petition supporting the temple. That's pretty much it.

 

The statement is from an email that appears to have been sent to members of the Frisco Texas Stake.  The forward says it "we have been asked by Elder Jonathan Cannon, our local Area Seventy, and the Area Communications Committee, to send the attached letter to members of our stake".

Do you know anyone in that stake?

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

THe letter that highlights how important the spire is for "religious observation" is a new twist and the language is unique and as far as I know, the church has never taught that a hugh steeple is an intrinsic part to DS religious observances.  There are a number of temples without spires or steeples. It seems  the church is using the language that comes from a law that was passed in the early 2000s that prohibits communities the object to religious structures if the structures are part of a denominations religious observances.  Here is a link to that law: https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2021/05/27/how-rluipa-protects-the-right-to-use-land-for-religious-purposes/?slreturn=20240325142657

If so that's pretty ingenious for the church to do.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, blackstrap said:

Not sure where I heard this but ChatGPT is inaccurate about 20% of the time and ,more concerning, will deny that it is wrong. Seems it has learned gaslighting is a human trait . 

I can believe it, at least for the free version.  I've heard the paid version is a lot better but I have no idea. 

I freelance writing articles on the side and use chatgpt to come up with the paragraph topics and overall order of the article, but I always rewrite it completely before submission.  It generally takes me a couple of hours+ to write a 600 word article so it doesn't save me much time, but it saves me annoyance at starting from scratch.  Chatgpt is very wordy and a lot of the time you can tell it's just stringing together big words but actually saying the same thing over and over again, just in different ways.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

The statement is from an email that appears to have been sent to members of the Frisco Texas Stake.  The forward says it "we have been asked by Elder Jonathan Cannon, our local Area Seventy, and the Area Communications Committee, to send the attached letter to members of our stake".

Do you know anyone in that stake?

Also Sherman Texas stake

Came across this, was it already posted?  It says the Church hasn’t confirmed the measurements yet, so maybe won’t be as tall.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/fairview-neighbors-concerned-height-size-projected-church-temple/287-b2be98f8-ea5f-4b1a-b7c5-4617aecc9193

[2BizE]

On 4/23/2024 at 5:16 PM, Calm said:

from the above link…

So what is to become of the Mesa temple, the Cardston Alberta temple, the Hong Kong temple, the New York temple? Will they need to be torn down and rebuilt because they do not have steeples? They obviously are not sending a religious message and cannot be religiously observed without a steeple.  

[Tacenda]

9 hours ago, 2BizE said:

So what is to become of the Mesa temple, the Cardston Alberta temple, the Hong Kong temple, the New York temple? Will they need to be torn down and rebuilt because they do not have steeples? They obviously are not sending a religious message and cannot be religiously observed without a steeple.  

No, they could put one in the ground like they did by some churches if I'm remembering right. Sort of saying this in jest. 

Edited April 26, 2024 by Tacenda

[Amulek]

15 hours ago, webbles said:

The statement is from an email that appears to have been sent to members of the Frisco Texas Stake.  The forward says it "we have been asked by Elder Jonathan Cannon, our local Area Seventy, and the Area Communications Committee, to send the attached letter to members of our stake".

Do you know anyone in that stake?

Not off the top of my head. My wife might though.

The two letters I've seen posted online appear to be legitimate. I just think it's weird that we are only seeing them from the surrounding areas while the stake closest to the temple itself (i.e., McKinney) hasn't done the same thing.

 

[Teancum]

17 hours ago, bluebell said:

If so that's pretty ingenious for the church to do.

Personally I find it disingenuous at best. To claim that a steeple is integral to LDS worship is not something that the church has ever taught that I am aware of. So why claim it as such?  Clearly only one reason. And to direct members to write letters in favor and telling some to include that claim but not everyone should (clearly so as to not look like this is a coordinated effort) seems borderline dishonest as well.  So much for being good neighbors.

Edited April 26, 2024 by Teancum

[JAHS]

4 hours ago, Amulek said:

Not off the top of my head. My wife might though.

The two letters I've seen posted online appear to be legitimate. I just think it's weird that we are only seeing them from the surrounding areas while the stake closest to the temple itself (i.e., McKinney) hasn't done the same thing.

 

Members of that stake do want a temple closer to where they live.

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

Personally I find it disingenuous at best. To claim that a steeple is integral to LDS worship is not something that the church has ever taught that I am aware of. So why claim it as such?  Clearly only one reason. And to direct members to write letters in favor and telling some to include that claim but not everyone should (clearly so as to not look like this is a coordinated effort) seems borderline dishonest as well.  So much for being good neighbors.

I guess it just depends on what a person means by integral.  Like I posted earlier, I grew up attending church at chapels where the design did not allow for a steeple, but the church wanted a spire pointing to heaven badly enough that they built one into the ground next to each one.

That would seem to indicate that spires (or steeples) are an important aspect of our religious beliefs, though probably not essential.  Does that mean that it needs to be a specific height?  I don't think so, but if the law allows for a spire or steeple of a certain height then using the law to get one approved seems smart to me.

Though, I have been involved in two contentious temple building projects outside of Utah and I don't have a lot of faith in the sincerity of the reasons that the people who try to stop them from happening--or try to keep them as small and unassuming as possible--give for why they don't want them.  I'm sure that colors my perspective some.

[Chum]

On 4/25/2024 at 6:02 PM, Calm said:

On 4/25/2024 at 5:57 PM, Teancum said:

An as noted this seems a new innovation. Where is the idea that the steeple is part of our religious observance taught? 

In the guy’s head who is writing it.  

Religious observances include types of clothing, so why not a building style?

[webbles]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

I guess it just depends on what a person means by integral.  Like I posted earlier, I grew up attending church at chapels where the design did not allow for a steeple, but the church wanted a spire pointing to heaven badly enough that they built one into the ground next to each one.

That would seem to indicate that spires (or steeples) are an important aspect of our religious beliefs, though probably not essential.  Does that mean that it needs to be a specific height?  I don't think so, but if the law allows for a spire or steeple of a certain height then using the law to get one approved seems smart to me.

Though, I have been involved in two contentious temple building projects outside of Utah and I don't have a lot of faith in the sincerity of the reasons that the people who try to stop them from happening--or try to keep them as small and unassuming as possible--give for why they don't want them.  I'm sure that colors my perspective some.

There are even temples with detached steeples.  The Frankfurt Germany Temple and Copenhagan Denmark temple have a single steeple that is detached.  Most of the temples with the sloped roof and 6 steeples (think Las Vegas or Dallas) have many of their steeples detached.

[Chum]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

the church wanted a spire pointing to heaven badly enough that they built one into the ground next to each one.

They do the 3-pack around here.  Well, 3+1.

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

I grew up attending church at chapels where the design did not allow for a steeple

Why?

Edited April 27, 2024 by Chum

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Chum said:

Religious observances include types of clothing, so why not a building style?

My problem is tying it to the height rather than just the presence of it.  I do think we have a significant history, though not in the sense that it is required, just that it is a choice of religious expression to place a steeple on a church or temple.

And I wouldn’t reject the height as part of that even as if there was a history in our faith of building tall majestic buildings where the height of them was specified as an example of religious observance, where perhaps it symbolized our efforts towards becoming closer to or as close as we can to God. That approach would be acceptable imo as I see temples and other religious buildings of symbols of our faith and not just because we practice our faith within them, but also the appearance and structure can certainly be part of an expression of worship and not just in the sense of creating a beautiful structure inside and out because it is the House of the Lord. For example, quite a few temples are constructed so one moves higher up as one goes through the endowment, arriving at the highest point, the Celestial Room. 

My concern is I don’t believe I have ever heard discussed such symbolism of the higher the better it expresses our devotion to God in our faith as far as I am aware. 

So instead of triggering thoughts of the above, my brain goes to Tower of Babel or Rameumptom, the only teachings of worship being tied to how high something is that I can remember from Church. 

[Chum]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

My problem is tying it to the height rather than just the presence of it.

Are you sure the height is the driver and not the effect of pulling eyes upward? 

Bluebell mentioned ground spires and that's what we have here.  IDK why they're on the ground, there's a bazillion steepled churches here.

[blackstrap]

I remember being told as a youth that churches had a steeple so that it could be recognized as a religious building in case of emergency or a stranger looking for it would see the spire from afar. My young brain accepted that reasoning. It may have just been following a Protestant tradition. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Chum said:

Are you sure the height is the driver and not the effect of pulling eyes upward

As was phrased in the letter, it was the height. 

[Chum]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

As was phrased in the letter, it was the height. 

Ah. When I absorbed it as a piece, I didn't come away with that impression. But in rereading it with a scripture-like focus on the wording, your interpretation is correct.

Perhaps he phrased it stupidly.

Edited April 27, 2024 by Chum