Temple Secrecy

[UVACoug]

That's my concern in trying to answer this question based on this interpretation. I see what they are saying, but I don't think the question contemplates this interpretation. Of course, an interviewer properly doing his job isn't supposed to inquire into a person's response, so I'm sure a wide variety of belief is represented in the temple.

I can also see what they are saying ... and I see they are full of crap. This kind of justification really gets under my skin. I have no problem with anyone believing whatever they want, but don't make up such absurd arguments to justify your lies to get a temple recommend. It is completely disrespectful of those that believe the Temple is a holy place.

[Mrs. Funk]

What about incest?

He's being sarcastic. Or maybe you are, too.

[Pelado]

He's being sarcastic. Or maybe you are, too.

Yes, it's my slightly less inappropriate edited version.

[Mrs. Funk]

Yes, it's my slightly less inappropriate edited version.

Yeah, I assumed as much after I hit post. Oh, well.

[UVACoug]

What about incest?

I don't feel bad about incest ... therefore it can't be what is intended when I am asked about the law of chastity.

[Pelado]

I don't feel bad about incest ... therefore it can't be what is intended when I am asked about the law of chastity.

FAIR enough.

[SCcoug]

What do you think a Revelator is? Pure genius right here.

That is included in the keys. They hold the right to receive church wide revelation. Whether they do or not isn't the question.

[Pheidippides]

And when they say "Do you keep the law of chastity?" I hear "Do you refrain from raping people?" Nothing else matters, as far as I am concerned.

It's important to not rape, so good for you, and congratulations!

[LA Ute]

I was told that the temple ceremony was a profound, life altering event. Where questions about the eternities would be answered. At the conclusion, I left with a feeling of "You mean that was it?"

That's a shame. The same thing happened to me. I hope/think we are doing better at not getting people's expectations up like that. I was fascinated to learn that David O. McKay, when he was president of the church, said even he was disappointed when he first received his temple endowment. I've taken a few people through the temple prep class lately and in those (correlated! ) materials the focus is much more realistic.

[Uncle Ted]

And when they say "Do you keep the law of chastity?" I hear "Do you refrain from raping people?" Nothing else matters, as far as I am concerned.

One has to wonder what some people hear when they are read that question...

Former Mormon bishop charged with sexually assaulting teen girls

Strong allegations against a former member of the Mormon Church in Menifee: The man is charged with sexually assaulting two teenagers, and police say there could be more victims.


The suspect has pleaded not guilty to the charges. He apparently met the two teens while he was at the church.


Murrieta resident Todd Mitchell Edwards, 49, is accused of sexually assaulting two teenage girls who reportedly went to the church where he was a bishop at one time. Edwards has pleaded not guilty to all charges. If convicted he faces up to nine years in prison. He remained incarcerated Tuesday on $65,000 bail.
[...]

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...ire&id=9127576

Yes, even leaders make mistakes now and then. They are men just like us. This is why I skip the "middle man" and take up my sins with the Lord himself.

[pellegrino]

What do you think a Revelator is? Pure genius right here.

thank you for keeping things civil, UVA. I know I can always count on you for a rational and respectful discussion.

[ERCougar]

You know, on the one hand (the other thread), you have people advising us to not get hung up on the minutiae of church history and whether or not JS actually translated anything, and just try to live a good life. But then in this thread, that approach is disrespectful of active believing members.

You're not the only one UVA...most of us would just like to stick to basic Christian principles. It's rarely if ever us pushing the issue.

[smokymountainrain]

You know, on the one hand (the other thread), you have people advising us to not get hung up on the minutiae of church history and whether or not JS actually translated anything, and just try to live a good life. But then in this thread, that approach is disrespectful of active believing members.

You're not the only one UVA...most of us would just like to stick to basic Christian principles. It's rarely if ever us pushing the issue.

I'll use this as an opportunity to make it clear that in the other thread, I am not advising or suggesting anybody handle things the way I have. I am merely attempting to describe my own point of view. If others choose to react differently upon learning of JS's indiscretions and other issues within the church and it's history, I understand and respect those positions as well.

[ERCougar]

I'll use this as an opportunity to make it clear that in the other thread, I am not advising or suggesting anybody handle things the way I have. I am merely attempting to describe my own point of view. If others choose to react differently upon learning of JS's indiscretions and other issues within the church and it's history, I understand and respect those positions as well.

Yeah, I don't think I was very clear in the other thread. I think the approach of "follow what works for me and my family now" is really the only sensible one, given that none of this is really knowable. I think we all do that, we just end up at different spots, like you point out. I wish more people were like you and open to people finding their own path, instead of declaring whether another's path is appropriate.

[UVACoug]

thank you for keeping things civil, UVA. I know I can always count on you for a rational and respectful discussion.

How was my question uncivil

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4 Beta