The properties near the temple were already there. The temple site itself was earmarked for light industry/business park development, so there was a lot of opposition from the local authority initially. The church does own the field but it can't be developed for housing.Niemand wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 5:38 pmThey didn't, but there are some very nice houses down the side of the Preston Temple. That said Chorley isn't a prime location for property.Robin Hood wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 6:50 amThey didn't here.JandD6572 wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 3:33 amWait, they do that with the land around the temples?Fred wrote: ↑November 21st, 2022, 9:07 pm
"Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"
should be...
"Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of Jesus Christ?"
No democrat on earth could answer this truthfully in the negative. It would not be possible for any Q15 to get a recommend unless they lied.
NONE of the things the church believes in are Christlike. If they were, they could not be democrats.
I had to explain to my daughter today the real reason the church keeps building temples even though membership is in a free fall. Temples are a cash cow. Buy 500 to a thousand acres of cheap land. Announce a temple. Build 500 high dollar homes on the cheap land surrounding the temple site. Profit a hundred grand on each home. Double that if they also provide financing. Rinse and Repeat.
It is, however, a much cleverer location than London's which seems to have been based on some GA's love of Gatwick airport.
The obvious development site for the Preston temple is the field behind the stake house. I believe the church owns it. But it is getting towards the motorway.
Temple Recommend Question Number 7
- Robin Hood
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13111
- Location: England
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
- Niemand
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13997
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Sounds like the locals got a good deal then. There is a big business park within a quarter mile away to the west from there anyway. To be fair the temple doesn't look too out of place architecturally either. There is a much older church further up the motorway I call the "false temple" because some people mistake its steeple for the temple's on the bus down.Robin Hood wrote: ↑November 23rd, 2022, 1:38 amThe properties near the temple were already there. The temple site itself was earmarked for light industry/business park development, so there was a lot of opposition from the local authority initially. The church does own the field but it can't be developed for housing.Niemand wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 5:38 pmThey didn't, but there are some very nice houses down the side of the Preston Temple. That said Chorley isn't a prime location for property.
It is, however, a much cleverer location than London's which seems to have been based on some GA's love of Gatwick airport.
The obvious development site for the Preston temple is the field behind the stake house. I believe the church owns it. But it is getting towards the motorway.
- ransomme
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4014
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Just saw a presentation/tour yesterday of the Preston site. All in all it seems pretty nice.
- HereWeGo
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1220
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
So you have to pay the church to receive your tokens and signs but you cannot resell them. The money can only flow one direction?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3351
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Yeah. Keep the money flowing to ensign peak.
ain’t nobody gonna pay us to see that garbage.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1769
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
1) Wasn't wearing his garments.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 7:16 amFWIW, the day Joseph was killed at Carthage, he:Mamabear wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 4:55 am The church is not honest or transparent at all and we should be interviewing them instead.
Also people need to stop putting their faith in objects. Garments, temples, tithing, temple recommends, etc. They associate their salvation with these things and it’s not healthy but superstitious.
1) Wasn't wearing his garments.
2) Drank wine.
3) Shot at people using fire arms they smuggled in.
4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.
It's interesting food for thought.
I didn't know this.
2) Drank wine.
This isn't against section 89 and it wasn't/perhaps still isn't a commandment.
3) Shot at people using firearms they smuggled in.
Good for him. I hope he got a couple of them.
4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.
I believe that Masonry is the apostate temple worship from apostolic times so this doesn't really bother me.
- Dusty Wanderer
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1411
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
It may also be telling that he thought some of his lodge brethren may have been out in the mob to hear it.Atrasado wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:05 am4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 7:16 amFWIW, the day Joseph was killed at Carthage, he:Mamabear wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 4:55 am The church is not honest or transparent at all and we should be interviewing them instead.
Also people need to stop putting their faith in objects. Garments, temples, tithing, temple recommends, etc. They associate their salvation with these things and it’s not healthy but superstitious.
1) Wasn't wearing his garments.
2) Drank wine.
3) Shot at people using fire arms they smuggled in.
4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.
It's interesting food for thought.
I believe that Masonry is the apostate temple worship from apostolic times so this doesn't really bother me.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3351
- MikeMaillet
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1594
- Location: Ingleside, Ontario
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Maybe Joseph knew who they were and the exclamation was more of an, "Et tu, Brute?" kind of a thing.Dusty Wanderer wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 6:08 pmIt may also be telling that he thought some of his lodge brethren may have been out in the mob to hear it.Atrasado wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:05 am4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 7:16 amFWIW, the day Joseph was killed at Carthage, he:Mamabear wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 4:55 am The church is not honest or transparent at all and we should be interviewing them instead.
Also people need to stop putting their faith in objects. Garments, temples, tithing, temple recommends, etc. They associate their salvation with these things and it’s not healthy but superstitious.
1) Wasn't wearing his garments.
2) Drank wine.
3) Shot at people using fire arms they smuggled in.
4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.
It's interesting food for thought.
I believe that Masonry is the apostate temple worship from apostolic times so this doesn't really bother me.
Mike
- FoxMammaWisdom
- The Heretic
- Posts: 3778
- Location: I think and I know things.
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Maybe the people in that meeting they had to plot his death? The one Brigham attended.MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:17 amMaybe Joseph knew who they were and the exclamation was more of an, "Et tu, Brute?" kind of a thing.Dusty Wanderer wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 6:08 pmIt may also be telling that he thought some of his lodge brethren may have been out in the mob to hear it.Atrasado wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:05 am4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 7:16 am
FWIW, the day Joseph was killed at Carthage, he:
1) Wasn't wearing his garments.
2) Drank wine.
3) Shot at people using fire arms they smuggled in.
4) Yelled out Masonic signals in hopes his lodge brethren would save him.
It's interesting food for thought.
I believe that Masonry is the apostate temple worship from apostolic times so this doesn't really bother me.
Mike
Don't have a link someone here must, I got the info from here.
- MikeMaillet
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1594
- Location: Ingleside, Ontario
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
That would be interesting.FoxMammaWisdom wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:42 amMaybe the people in that meeting they had to plot his death? The one Brigham attended.MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:17 amMaybe Joseph knew who they were and the exclamation was more of an, "Et tu, Brute?" kind of a thing.Dusty Wanderer wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 6:08 pmIt may also be telling that he thought some of his lodge brethren may have been out in the mob to hear it.
Mike
Don't have a link someone here must, I got the info from here.
Mike
- FoxMammaWisdom
- The Heretic
- Posts: 3778
- Location: I think and I know things.
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
I just found a bunch of info about the plot to murder JS compiled here on Steven's blog:MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 11:30 amThat would be interesting.FoxMammaWisdom wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:42 amMaybe the people in that meeting they had to plot his death? The one Brigham attended.MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:17 amMaybe Joseph knew who they were and the exclamation was more of an, "Et tu, Brute?" kind of a thing.Dusty Wanderer wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 6:08 pm
It may also be telling that he thought some of his lodge brethren may have been out in the mob to hear it.
Mike
Don't have a link someone here must, I got the info from here.
Mike
https://seekingyhwh.org/resources/joseph-smiths-murder/
- MikeMaillet
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1594
- Location: Ingleside, Ontario
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Thank you. I'm going to enjoy this material.FoxMammaWisdom wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 12:09 pmI just found a bunch of info about the plot to murder JS compiled here on Steven's blog:MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 11:30 amThat would be interesting.FoxMammaWisdom wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:42 amMaybe the people in that meeting they had to plot his death? The one Brigham attended.MikeMaillet wrote: ↑December 7th, 2022, 10:17 am
Maybe Joseph knew who they were and the exclamation was more of an, "Et tu, Brute?" kind of a thing.
Mike
Don't have a link someone here must, I got the info from here.
Mike
https://seekingyhwh.org/resources/joseph-smiths-murder/
Mike
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 614
Re: Temple Recommend Question Number 7
Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 7:28 amIf you call working on different projects where there is common agreement (while recognizing differences) as an affiliation, then the Church has had MANY unsavory affiliations with people who you don't like very much. Now, guess which president of the Church started off these affiliations?ransomme wrote: ↑November 22nd, 2022, 4:18 amThe Church affiliated with the UN, various LGBTQ groups, and many other groups that conflict.Subcomandante wrote: ↑November 21st, 2022, 8:40 pmThey can answer in the affirmative even after declaring support for the act.LDS Physician wrote: ↑November 21st, 2022, 6:32 pm "Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"
Can any of the 15 answer this in the negative after their declared support of the marriage act?
I've already had 2 members ask me this when I've read this question to them during recommend interviews.
It reminds me back in the day when I'd ask the (now changed) question which asked "Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?"
Multiple members would ask me, "Do the Boy Scouts of America count?" Back when the BSA was wandering into LGBT realms.
This is getting ... uncomfortable.
The reason for this is that they are not affirming that teaching within the bounds of the Church. The moment they do that, then they can answer in the negative.
The moment when any LDS Church official starts officiating in a same sex marriage ceremony within his calling (not as a clerk for example), is the moment which he commits an act of apostasy and he would be excommunicable.
That's right. It was President Ezra Taft Benson. A shocker to be sure by many people on this forum, especially his rhetoric against these organisms in the 60s.
President Benson at that point of time was not cognizant of these happenings……
u are exactly right though, it was during his latter days of mortal life that these entanglements where made…….and it was done at that point in time, so that people would claim…..EXACTLY what u just did! so as to squelch any argument from the “conservative” portion of the membership when this topic would arise