mod edit wrote:You didn't really say anything with your comment except to show that you don't intend to support your conclusions, but rather just reassert them in different ways. When you do that I'm just going to point out that you're just trying to zing people and not engage any real debate.
What you are doing is asserting I stated that I found no symbolism in the temple. I never said this. When Mormon I did find symbolism that turned out to be an effort of inventing or adopting interpretations of the movie and handshake game that fit with my ever decreasing Mormon worldview.
As expected your (moderator edit by harmony: personal attack) stamping about effort has once again culminated in you demanding I adopt a position I have not stated. Get with the program. If you can't wrap your head around the structures I am trying to illuminate then don't get involved with the discussion. As always its an effort to keep you on track with the fun parts of the conversation and deflecting the constant (moderator edit by harmony: delete personal attack)you try to pass off.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
harmony wrote: My understanding was they were virtually the same ceremony.
Far from it, though they share similarities.
What do the "applicable utilitarian approaches to life" consist of?
blip
blip
blip
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Mercury wrote:What you are doing is asserting I stated that I found no symbolism in the temple. I never said this.
You're right. My bad.
Mercury wrote:When Mormon I did find symbolism that turned out to be an effort of inventing or adopting interpretations of the movie and handshake game that fit with my ever decreasing Mormon worldview.
And do you assume it's that way for everyone?
Mercury wrote:As expected your childish stamping about effort has once again culminated in you demanding I adopt a position I have not stated. Get with the program. If you can't wrap your head around the structures I am trying to illuminate then don't get involved with the discussion. As always its an effort to keep you on track with the fun parts of the conversation and deflecting the constant smarmy pseudointelectual claptrap you try to pass off.
I was wrong to conclude you claimed you didn't find any symbolism, but you're still rejecting the value of the temple based exclusively on your own subjective experiences there and your retrospective on that experience from a critical framework. The fundamental point still stands. Your perspective on the temple is yours and yours alone, so until you have something significant to add, let's keep it that way.
This points to a real problem the Church faces today. Its policy has been to obfuscate and dismiss unflattering information for years. This has worked reasonably well in insulating membership from "anti" attack. However, it also puts the members at a clear disadvantage. The paragraph you cited shows the Church still wishes to keep its young membership naïve to control their perception of the temple, a strategy which no longer holds any water. This is partly because much of the ridiculousness of the temple becomes apparent once you talk to another human being about it. If they had good temple preparation classes, more young people would say "you have got to be kidding me.
Actually I have had the opportunity to prepare a quite a few young people for their first temple visit. When preparing them I walk them through the endowment in quite a bit of detail. All were quite interested and actually said the preparation I had given them was very helpful and without it there first temple experience would have been less enjoyable. None ever acted like the temple was ridiculous.
The majority, I think the vast majority, of the inactives are converts. And I think SLCentral knows this and thinks of converts as expendable.
I think this is unfair and that you are very wrong. Think of all the talks about retaining new members. Think about GBHs talks. He even did a whole special church wide fireside on this. Efforts and directions from the top down to bishops to use all ward members in helping to retain have been emphasized over and over. Missionaries are to come to PEC and Ward Council to help cover what is up with investigating and new members and to coordinate retention efforts with the ward. Ward missionaries are assigned to work in transitioning new members. If you base what the leaders teach and emphasize and ask SPs and Bishops to focus resources on as an indication about what is important to the Church then retaining converts is right at the top. If you are unaware of this then really are out of the loop on such things.
by the way, there is a loss of active kids too. Only about 30% of all young men end up ordained Elders. What the mix of that is from active vs, in active families I do not know.
On another note, I will pray for your son. My boy is a Marine and has been to Iraq twice. He is now a Sergeant and he re-enlisted for four more years. He most likely will deploy in March 2009 once again. To where he is not sure at this point.
Jason Bourne wrote:My boy is a Marine and has been to Iraq twice. He is now a Sergeant and he re-enlisted for four more years. He most likely will deploy in March 2009 once again. To where he is not sure at this point.
You have a brave son. I'm sure you are very proud. Please give him the thanks and appreciation of all the Americans on this bb for his service.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
This points to a real problem the Church faces today. Its policy has been to obfuscate and dismiss unflattering information for years. This has worked reasonably well in insulating membership from "anti" attack. However, it also puts the members at a clear disadvantage. The paragraph you cited shows the Church still wishes to keep its young membership naïve to control their perception of the temple, a strategy which no longer holds any water. This is partly because much of the ridiculousness of the temple becomes apparent once you talk to another human being about it. If they had good temple preparation classes, more young people would say "you have got to be kidding me.
Actually I have had the opportunity to prepare a quite a few young people for their first temple visit. When preparing them I walk them through the endowment in quite a bit of detail. All were quite interested and actually said the preparation I had given them was very helpful and without it there first temple experience would have been less enjoyable. None ever acted like the temple was ridiculous.
When reading your reply Jason I heard it as "no one questioned what they were doing. No one made a comment that they thought it was weird. No one SAID that it was odd, creepy, etc.
Why, its almost as if you expect dissent from other parties to rule your perception of something.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
harmony wrote:What do the "applicable utilitarian approaches to life" consist of?
blah
blah
blah
Allegory and commitments. Like I said, they are nothing alike but share common methods of teaching. The Masonic ceremony is rich with life lessons, unlike the cheap king-making ceremony for Mormons.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Mercury wrote:Allegory and commitments. Like I said, they are nothing alike but share common methods of teaching. The Masonic ceremony is rich with life lessons, unlike the cheap king-making ceremony for Mormons.
In other words, you can't give any examples of "life lessons".
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
When reading your reply Jason I heard it as "no one questioned what they were doing. No one made a comment that they thought it was weird. No one SAID that it was odd, creepy, etc.
Why, its almost as if you expect dissent from other parties to rule your perception of something
Merc
I am a bit slow today. Horrible headache. Could you clarify your second sentence? It is not sinking in.