If the land was donated by a wealthy member then isn't the answer that the Church is too cheap to give up the free ride?
Maybe Nielson can sell his land and then buy land for the Church in the right zone and the Church would be cool with it?
If I’m not mistaken it wasn’t the temple that people (most anyway) were concerned with as much as the tower and the lighting. Those issues are being negotiated and will most likely be resolved. The brouhaha will end up being water under the bridge.
No, that's not an accurate assessment of the situation. You missed the point of the post.
...this is what is so odd about this. Why couldn't the LDS church respect the established zoning laws and respect the established masterplan, and build accordingly?
It was suggested earlier in one of these threads that Cody residents should compromise and work with the LDS church, I assume so the LDS church can get their way peacefully. What should actually happen is that the LDS church should be respectful of the laws of the land already in place, and 'compromise' by abiding by the zoning laws and the Cody master plan, already in place for its community. The bullying and threatening engaged in by the lawyers representing the LDS church is inexcusable.
If I’m not mistaken it wasn’t the temple that people (most anyway) were concerned with as much as the tower and the lighting. Those issues are being negotiated and will most likely be resolved. The brouhaha will end up being water under the bridge.
No, that's not an accurate assessment of the situation. You missed the point of the post.
...this is what is so odd about this. Why couldn't the LDS church respect the established zoning laws and respect the established masterplan, and build accordingly?
It was suggested earlier in one of these threads that Cody residents should compromise and work with the LDS church, I assume so the LDS church can get their way peacefully. What should actually happen is that the LDS church should be respectful of the laws of the land already in place, and 'compromise' by abiding by the zoning laws and the Cody master plan, already in place for its community. The bullying and threatening engaged in by the lawyers representing the LDS church is inexcusable.
Whether the church is in the right legally or not, this is likely what will be remembered for many years, and talked about, whenever the topic of the temple comes up among local non-members.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
When I was a newish member, on a Friday evening 3 or 4 times a year I drove 90 minutes to the nearest stake center, and got on a bus for a 12-hour trip to the temple. We arrived exhausted, and (some of us anyway ) slept through several sessions before getting on the bus again for the return trip. I usually got home in time for Sacrament meeting.
In Britain, temple marriages are not legally recognized - marriage ceremonies must be held in public. Before a recent change was made by the church, newly-weds had to be chaperoned from the time of the wedding ceremony until their sealing, because if they ... ahem ... acted like newly-weds, then they had to wait for a year before they could be sealed. In the "old" days, when most members were relatively poor, and didn't own cars, that usually meant having a Friday afternoon wedding, then spending their wedding night on a bus with a couple of dozen members constantly making jokes about their situation, being sealed, going through one of more vicarious sessions, and getting back on the bus with the same people who had been tormenting them the previous night.
I could tell another couple of stories about these temple trips, but they would be rather off topic for this thread. Perhaps I'll start a thread for temple-related stories - faith promoting and faith damaging alike.
Really cool and enlightening information, malkie! I like this idea of the temple-stories thread.
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
“DCP” wrote: An increasing proportion of Latter-day Saints live in what has sometimes been called the “Third World.” For many of them, I expect, the temples of the Church may well be the most beautiful buildings they are ever permitted to enter—and, yes, a harbinger of the blessings awaiting the faithful in the world to come. As a pampered and privileged resident of perhaps the wealthiest nation in human history, I’m happy if my tithes can help in even a small way to provide that experience for them, and I’m strongly disinclined to deprive them of it.
I think the Mormon temples I've seen do look beautiful from the outside. Big white buildings, not just blocks but not overly complicated. I've never been inside one but the interior images I've seen are less impressive: more like a rich grandmother's living room than anything I'd call celestial. There's no arguing about taste, though.
Being glad to bring something one considers beautiful to a poorer country seems perfectly reasonable. Aid in the essentials of life has a higher priority, but humans don't just live by bread. Giving poor people beautiful architecture is generous, too.
Saying that Mormon temple interiors will give poor people an idea of heaven sure strikes a sour note for me, though. We're so wealthy, by jove, our carpets and curtains must be like heaven to poor people. Ugh.
I think the Mormon temples I've seen do look beautiful from the outside. Big white buildings, not just blocks but not overly complicated. I've never been inside one but the interior images I've seen are less impressive: more like a rich grandmother's living room than anything I'd call celestial. There's no arguing about taste, though.
Being glad to bring something one considers beautiful to a poorer country seems perfectly reasonable. Aid in the essentials of life has a higher priority, but humans don't just live by bread. Giving poor people beautiful architecture is generous, too.
Saying that Mormon temple interiors will give poor people an idea of heaven sure strikes a sour note for me, though. We're so wealthy, by jove, our carpets and curtains must be like heaven to poor people. Ugh.
But Mormons don't 'give' poor people temples, they charge them a percentage of their income that is disproportionately burdensome, before they are allowed to enter and receive what Mormons define as ordinances that are considered by them to be necessary for 'exaltation.' That's the distasteful part.
... the interior images I've seen are less impressive: more like a rich grandmother's living room than anything I'd call celestial.
Wonder if the determination of what the Celestial Rooms should look like came more from the senior Brethren or their wives. God prefers Elizabethan English so it only follows that he would appreciate the style of the French court.
When the very expensive Temple furniture is thrown away it must be burned rather than being donated to a nursing home or the poor. It has been consecrated by the Brethren and they would not want the holy ions being emanated from the used furniture to be sullied by the riff-raff. Can you imagine those people putting a coffee mug on the Lord's table?
Members only receive their temple ordinances once. So they only need to attend the temple once. After they’ve been “endowed” and “sealed” they can stop going and stop paying tithing. Their Celestial access has been granted. Now if the Church wants proxy ordinances done for other people, the Church can pay the relevant tithing to cover it.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
) slept through several sessions before getting on the bus again for the return trip. I usually got home in time for Sacrament meeting.
