Simon, a new perspective

[_Doctor Scratch]

"[The thought of Dr. Scratch] makes me wish that my assault rifle weren't in my neighbor's gun safe."---Daniel C. Peterson

I am guessing Scratch feels much like you do right now...

That's a statement of protection.

The same as saying "The thought of a grizzly bear makes me wish that my assault rifle weren't in my neighbor's gun safe." That doesn't mean I want to seek out and destroy all grizzly bears -- just that I want to protect myself and my family.

No. It was said in the spirit of giddy revenge. This was the entire post:

It makes me wish that my assault rifle weren't in my neighbor's gun safe.

Do you realize that the barrel of that gun actually begins almost to glow when I fire a few rounds?

What's funny about this comment is that I hadn't been around for some time. I had been away from the board for some weeks, as I recall. Eric turned up and said:

Ironically, Scratch hasn't shown up once on this thread. I hope he is off vacationing somewhere nice, not thinking about you or this place.

To which Dr. Peterson replied:

He may be hiding in the bushes outside my house.

...which in turn led to DCP's now-infamous post about the "assault rifle."

You have to admit, this is pretty hilarious (i.e., him neurotically obsessing about me while I've been away) in light of his recent "experiment."

Later in the thread, he elaborated further upon his hostile and violent fantasies:

Actually, I simply had an image in my mind of him hopping on his little goat hoofs down the street, to the tune of bulllets from an AK-47 ricocheting off the asphalt under them. ("Dance, pardner!") Nothing quite so bloody as you suggest.

The thread is really pretty remarkable, and of historical important as far as MDB is concerned. It's the one where DCP's "outing" of GoodK got discussed in some detail. Based on what I can tell, I hadn't participated on the board for a full two weeks, and perhaps more, and yet here was Dr. Peterson, "joking" about firing an AK-47 at me.

viewtopic.php?p=169196#p169196

[_Blixa]

OK, smartass, I don't know why you're being obnoxious with me when I think that I have kept our conversation civil.

Obviously, yes, these are also acts of symbolism. What I meant to say was that they were not as intense as the temple ceremony, and the other ceremonies in Catholicism and Judaism I mentioned.

Please treat me with the respect I deserve or this conversation will end here and now.

I think a couple of Darth's replies have sounded a bit "snippy" to me too, liz, but I took them more as snappy jocularity than mean-spirited disrespect.

I don't necessarily have a problem with the temple ritual, as ritual. Its actual script and costuming are maybe a bit more troublesome to me, but in light of George Miller's recent work, I think I'm beginning to see it, or at least its origins, in a different light. And because of this, I think that Darth's initial characterization of it as a form of cosplay might not be a bad point of comparison. I don't think that has to be taken as a trivializing analogy. I think it even merits some further thought and discussion.

Of course, I realize that I'm coming at this from a much more abstract position than most of the people here because I never went through the temple. I have no emotional attachment or after effects of any kind associated with it.

[_consiglieri]

I guess we can infer from this that angels are Freemasons.

And Orrin Porter Rockwell is the Tyler.

[_Yahoo Bot]

I guess we can infer from this that angels are Freemasons.

And Orrin Porter Rockwell is the Tyler.

Very good. And I thought you were a complete Moran (using the spelling popular here) for crying over your Gospel Doctrine release.

[_Darth J]

And, Darth, through all of your smugness, you still have not demonstrated how the LDS temple ceremony is any worse, or anymore negative, than any other symbolically-intensive religious ceremony.

If you want to talk about the idea that a cracker blessed by a priest literally turns into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, be my guest.

Liz, the Church teaches that you need a secret handshake and a secret password to get into God's super-special club. As part of the overall ritual, you get underwear with Masonic symbols that protect you from evil. And so on with things that per board rules cannot be mentioned in this forum (specific temple content). I am glad that you find this exercise to be meaningful. I no longer do, and never really did. I just liked going in the building. Eventually, though, I figured out that I didn't need to try endure that ritual so I could have a couple of minutes to meditate in a brightly-lit room decorated like an upscale hotel lobby to feel close to God.

So, if people like McDonald's, what's wrong with it? Should it be condemned, simply because you don't like it? Shouldn't whether or not one eats there be a matter of choice and personal preference?

Comparing the LDS Church to McDonald's may be more apt of an analogy than you were intending.

I appreciate your point, and thank you for your civility. Maybe Darth can follow your example.

Maybe!

Although I'm not sure why today you feel like my being a smart ass in general is a personal attack.

[_Yoda]

Hello,

I object to Ms. Liz being a complete and utter Bitch to Mr. Darth J. He's a gentleman and should be treated as such.

V/R
Dr. Cameron

It sounds like Cassius needs to offer a course in reading comprehension for it's professors.

[_Blixa]

Hello,

I object to Ms. Liz being a complete and utter Bitch to Mr. Darth J. He's a gentleman and should be treated as such.

V/R
Dr. Cameron

It sounds like Cassius needs to offer a course in reading comprehension for it's professors.

Ignore this twaddle, liz.

On the other hand, go back to Darth's incompletely formulated cosplay analogy and examine it through the lenses of George Miller. I think a quite interesting image might emerge that could enlarge all our grasp of the Mormon temple ceremony and its evolution.

[_honorentheos]

Perhaps getting away from the term "cosplay" and moving to ritual would be more productive.

Myth and Ritual

I know I'm quoting wiki here, but there are a number of good links to developed thoughts in it that get at what I think Blixa is hinting. Or if not what she means, it's how I take it myself.

The subject is very interesting, especially when we allow ourselves to examine non-religious cultural myths-as-ritual that belong to most of us I suspect. Using "myth" in it's anthropological sense of course, and not as a dismissive.

The key point to consider is that ritual, when performed from the position of believer, places one in proximity to the subtler aspects of the underlying myth. To one who can not allow themselves to believe, the act of assuming a role in the myth is very much cosplay.

[_Yoda]

If you want to talk about the idea that a cracker blessed by a priest literally turns into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, be my guest.

Actually, no. I think we are simply talking past each other. The point I was getting at was that the sacrament and the endowment ceremonies are both symbolic in nature.

Liz, the Church teaches that you need a secret handshake and a secret password to get into God's super-special club. As part of the overall ritual, you get underwear with Masonic symbols that protect you from evil. And so on with things that per board rules cannot be mentioned in this forum (specific temple content). I am glad that you find this exercise to be meaningful. I no longer do, and never really did. I just liked going in the building. Eventually, though, I figured out that I didn't need to try endure that ritual so I could have a couple of minutes to meditate in a brightly-lit room decorated like an upscale hotel lobby to feel close to God.

And that is certainly your choice. I respect your difference in belief. All I am asking is that you respect mine, and those of others. My whole point in this discussion, which you seem to have overlooked, is that ALL religions have differences, and many have rituals which are symbolic in nature. Frankly, as I have studied different religions, I have found the differences both fascinating and enlightening. I just honestly don't see how the ritualistic ceremonies associated with the LDS Church are anymore negative in nature than those types of ceremonies found in other various religions.

And, there is absolutely nothing that you have stated, or pointed to in this discussion, which has led to that type of conclusion.

Although I'm not sure why today you feel like my being a smart ass in general is a personal attack.

I like you, Darth, and I find that your smart-ass personality is, in general, part of your charm.

However, when you attempt to call me stupid in a round-about way by pointing out that I hurriedly used the word, "all", and replied to me in this fashion:

Liz, you know in sacrament meeting, when they pass out the bread and water? That isn't a snack.

And you know when you're 8, and they dress you up in white and then dunk you underwater? They're not taking you swimming.

Then, yes, I consider it a personal attack.

If it was not meant as one, then I accept your apology.

[_Yoda]

I guess we can infer from this that angels are Freemasons.

And Orrin Porter Rockwell is the Tyler.

Very good. And I thought you were a complete Moran (using the spelling popular here) for crying over your Gospel Doctrine release.

Note to Darth:

Above is an example of a mean-spirited personal attack given in poor taste...to a very sweet and knowledgeable man, I might add.

Of course, from Yahoo Bot, I would expect nothing less.

I expect much more from you. ;-)