Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 5/12/2002 3:29:42 PM EDT
Fear of a Mormon return, Nauvoo, Illinois' fundamentalists feel threatened by giant temple. At fundamentalist church gatherings in this bend of the Mississippi River, Rocky and Helen Hulse paint a menacing specter: legions of impeccably groomed Mormons pedaling house to house on bicycles, robbing anyone at home of their immortal souls. They sound the alarm because of a $30 million temple to be dedicated June 27 in this farm town of 1,100 that is also a revered historical and religious site for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Mormon founder Joseph Smith is said to have received many of his revelations in Nauvoo. The town's early history is intertwined with church scripture and doctrine; many Mormons can trace their family histories directly back to the area. In the three-state region around Nauvoo, fundamentalist churches have prepared their flocks for what they see as an army of Mormon invaders who will attend the temple's open house beginning May 6. "The pastors know they are going to lose people to the Mormons, and they want their people warned," said Colleen Ralson, who runs the Nauvoo Christian Visitors Center, a storefront exhibit and clearinghouse that counters the Mormon presence in town. "The temple is an insult to Christianity," said Rocky Hulse, a former Mormon who wants to "educate" his fellow born-again Christians about Mormonism. more... [url]http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/04/29/MN113880.DTL[/url]
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 3:37:24 PM EDT
Yep, but let me be the first to point out that the areas' "funda[b]mental[/b]ist" christians, are just that... [whacko]
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 3:37:40 PM EDT
Yes, Nauvoo Illinois is the Mormon place near the BRC. medcop
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 3:39:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/12/2002 3:40:22 PM EDT by LotBoy]
I see the bigotry still runs deep in those parts!
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 3:47:38 PM EDT
The 2 dominant religions in this area are Catholic and Lutheran, but obviously used to be Mormon... Back when the original Temple was destroyed, there were literally "wars" between Quincy and Navoo for numerous reasons, but these were very much based upon the actions of the original Mormon settlers. As for the above story, this is certainly the first I've heard of any negatives about the new temple construction... Navoo has always been a tourist community that centered around the ruins and the historic village, so other than having a new temple to worship in, why should things be any different..? it has always been and will continue to be a Mormon community. While I am not a Mormon, I certainly do like their "family/community first" approach, which the rest of society seems to have forsaken!
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 4:05:42 PM EDT
I'm trying to understand this. Is it BenDover for the big Mormon thing? Or BenDover against the big Mormon thing?
Link Posted: 5/12/2002 4:21:29 PM EDT
Originally Posted By grimshaw: I'm trying to understand this. Is it BenDover for the big Mormon thing? Or BenDover against the big Mormon thing?
View Quote
Indifferent. I just remember Tim posting that message a while back about some Mormon destination in conjunction with the BRC. Then I read this article today and it reminded me of the previous topic. For all I care, they can all dance around the flagpole. That includes the fun duh mental ists.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 4:08:22 AM EDT
If he would be so inclined to share it, Grin has a [u]very[/u] interesting story about the lynch mob that stormed the local jail and killed Joseph Smith...
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 6:40:18 AM EDT
Closer communities like Warsaw, Hamilton & Carthage, IL feared Navoo more as did the State Gov. At the time, people may have been far less tolerant of "cult" religious. Smith had left NY & then been kicked out of OH & MO. In IL the large concentration of Mormons was seen by many as an attempt to start their own country. (Same thing happened when they moved to UT) After a local (non-morman) newspaper published accusations of heresy, adultery, and fornication against him in the first and only issue of the Nauvoo Expositor on June 7th, 1844. The Expositor also described Smith's embezzlement of city funds set aside for building the town's temple. Smith ordered the presses destroyed a few days later. The charges for destroying this press were the basis the for the Smith's arrest, then new charges of treason were added with the Govenor & State troops arriving to make sure the Navoo Morman militia was kept in line. When the troops left Carthage for Navoo, the local Carthage militia decided there was some disturbance outside town & while they were gone a mob gathered around the jail. Who fired first is always debated but Smith fired upon them with a pistol smuggled into him & then was killed by the mob.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 6:53:01 AM EDT
I will try to find the complete story, but weren't there cannons set up along the river by the miltia to try to protect the town. Also I think those cannons as well as other small arms were built by Jonathan Browning. In fact they so needed his protection, he was litterally the last out of town. he was the father of John Moses Browning. There is museum there of his stuff too. Later IAJack
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 7:04:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2002 7:07:11 AM EDT by BYU]
Originally Posted By Grin_N_Barrett: Closer communities like Warsaw, Hamilton & Carthage, IL feared Navoo more as did the State Gov. At the time, people may have been far less tolerant of "cult" religious. Smith had left NY & then been kicked out of OH & MO. In IL the large concentration of Mormons was seen by many as an attempt to start their own country. (Same thing happened when they moved to UT) After a local (non-morman) newspaper published accusations of heresy, adultery, and fornication against him in the first and only issue of the Nauvoo Expositor on June 7th, 1844. The Expositor also described Smith's embezzlement of city funds set aside for building the town's temple. Smith ordered the presses destroyed a few days later. The charges for destroying this press were the basis the for the Smith's arrest, then new charges of treason were added with the Govenor & State troops arriving to make sure the Navoo Morman militia was kept in line. When the troops left Carthage for Navoo, the local Carthage militia decided there was some disturbance outside town & while they were gone a mob gathered around the jail. Who fired first is always debated but Smith fired upon them with a pistol smuggled into him & then was killed by the mob.
View Quote
So, do you like baloney or just feeding it to others? If you want to know what really happened, ask a Mormon or do some research on the matter yourself. Open the link below and search on Carthage. Select the first link, which talks about the martydom of Joseph Smith and company at the hands of a mob in Carthage Jail. [url]http://library.lds.org[/url]
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 7:23:44 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BYU: So, do you like baloney or just feeding it to others? If you want to know what really happened, ask a Mormon or do some research on the matter yourself. Open the link below and search on Carthage. Select the first link, which talks about the martydom of Joseph Smith and company at the hands of a mob in Carthage Jail. [url]http://library.lds.org[/url]
View Quote
Thanks for posting that unimpeachably neutral and independent source. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 8:42:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Originally Posted By BYU: So, do you like baloney or just feeding it to others? If you want to know what really happened, ask a Mormon or do some research on the matter yourself. Open the link below and search on Carthage. Select the first link, which talks about the martydom of Joseph Smith and company at the hands of a mob in Carthage Jail. [url]http://library.lds.org[/url]
View Quote
Thanks for posting that unimpeachably neutral and independent source. [rolleyes]
View Quote
If someone had a question about firearms, would you cite AR15.com or HDI as your "source" - ? Why - ? Perhaps because one is more credible than the other? BYU did exactly the same thing. I have had it with the anti-religious attitude around here. You seem to revel in it. Belittling others for their religious beliefs is childish and ignorant. I'm through with this bunch. To DonR, Anti, Grin, Ed Sr., and my other friends here, I wish you the best. Bud
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:02:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Bud: If someone had a question about firearms, would you cite AR15.com or HDI as your "source" - ? Why - ? Perhaps because one is more credible than the other? BYU did exactly the same thing.
View Quote
If I was trying to convince a sceptic, I would use [b]independent[/b] sources for my information. What good is countering one partisan rant with another. That's what I was commenting on.
I have had it with the anti-religious attitude around here. You seem to revel in it. Belittling others for their religious beliefs is childish and ignorant.
View Quote
I don't revel in anti-religious anything. There is a range of opinions here, and perhaps that gets under your skin. You might find that you're more comfortable on a Mormons-only gun site.
I'm through with this bunch. To DonR, Anti, Grin, Ed Sr., and my other friends here, I wish you the best. Bud
View Quote
Well, what do you know? Don't let the door hit you where the good Lord split you.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:11:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22: Thanks for posting that unimpeachably neutral and independent source. [rolleyes]
View Quote
Hmmm, let's see, did you read it? Did you compare it to other historical accounts of what happened, or did you just ASSume that it is biased wrongly because it came from a Mormon author on the LDS Church's web site? Like I said in my original post-if you really want to know what happened you should either ask a Mormon or do your own independent research. I just provided a link to read another account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo rather than take some revisionist history, cliff-notes version of the story at face value. I did not ask that you like it, nor did I assert that it was an independent/neutal account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo (even a Marine should be able to figure that out). It is simply another account of what happened, and I found it to be more historically accurate than the revisionist history/cliff-notes version of what that was provided by another poster on this topic. As far as the original question of the topic-the answer is yes, this is the big thing happening near the BRC. As far as the locals freking out that the Mormons are coming back, get over it-we are not coming back to steal your daughters, kill your men folk, get you to join our 'cult', take your land, control your minds, or any other such nonsense. We came back to re-build our temple and provide a place of worship for LDS folks in the region. The Latter-day Saints founded Nauvoo and now they want to come back and remember what happended there for historical/spiritual purposes. During that process they will spend large amounts of $$$ as this will become even more of a historical/vacation spot then in the past. Most of the locals are looking forward to the amount of $$$ that will pass through the economy, brought there by Mormon tourists, and not worrying that the fundamentalist-imagined boogey man is coming to steal their towns and posses their souls. Get real. My wife and I were planning to attend both the BRC & the Nauvoo Temple, but had to change plans because I am wrapping up college during that time. We will have to go next year. Oh well. [/rant off]
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:13:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2002 9:14:59 AM EDT by Am-O-Tramp]
"Son stay out of churches, the only key they hold is to the shithouse." Churches today are getting more dirtier, rottener, self aggrandizing and scheming by the fucking minute. Better to go to saloon cuss and be marry than be part of a religion today. There is something wrong when a preacher gets more strange ass and has more worldly goods to play with (in the name of Jesus) than the idiots that pay for it all. Amen.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:15:29 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Am-O-Tramp: "Son stay out of churches, the only key they hold is to the shithouse." Churches today are getting more dirtier, rottener, self aggrandizing and scheming by the fucking minute. Better to go to saloon cuss and be marry than be part of a religion today. There is something wrong when a preacher gets more strange ass and has more worldly goods to play with (in the name of Jesus) than the idiots that pay for it all. Amen.
View Quote
What?
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:40:46 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:43:23 AM EDT
Originally Posted By BYU: Hmmm, let's see, did you read it? Did you compare it to other historical accounts of what happened, or did you just ASSume that it is biased wrongly because it came from a Mormon author on the LDS Church's web site?
View Quote
I read it, and found that it of course paints only the most complimentary picture of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum, as well as of the charges under which they were imprisoned and the circumstances of their deaths. I didn't say it was "biased wrongly," did I? I said that it wasn't an "unimpeachably neutral and independent source," such as one might want to quote when trying to convince a sceptic.
Like I said in my original post-if you really want to know what happened you should either ask a Mormon or do your own independent research. I just provided a link to read another account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo rather than take some revisionist history, cliff-notes version of the story at face value.
View Quote
Revisionism is in the eye of the beholder. I don't have skin in this game, but telling people they can find out "what really happened" in the archives of the Mormon church is assuming quite a bit.
I did not ask that you like it, nor did I assert that it was an independent/neutal account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo (even a Marine should be able to figure that out). It is simply another account of what happened, and I found it to be more historically accurate than the revisionist history/cliff-notes version of what that was provided by another poster on this topic.
View Quote
Even a Mormon should be able to figure out that insulting me is not the way to convince me of anything. I'm not anti-Mormon at all. One of my best friends growing up was a Mormon, and he and his parents never treated me as anything less than a member of their family. They never tried to proselytize me or tell me I was going to hell if I didn't get on board.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:46:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
Originally Posted By BYU: As far as the locals freking out that the Mormons are coming back, get over it-we are not coming back to steal your daughters, kill your men folk, get you to join our 'cult', take your land, control your minds, or any other such nonsense.
View Quote
Geez, I was thinking of joining up, but forget it now. All the fun is gone. [;)] Seriously, I have several clients who are LDS, and, guess what, guys, they espouse pretty much the same political mindset we do. Guess which state is considered to be the most conservative/Republican? Why did Impeached President Clinton declare 1/3 of Utah to be a National Monument, thus screwing the residents of that state half to death? There's a connection between my last two sentences. IOW, the Mormons are our friends politically. [b]I do know, from experience, they are not friendly if you go to SLC. I have never understood that. Not much "brotherly love" for non LDS. [/b]
View Quote
The next time that you are in the SLC area, look me up. I will buy you a round and take you to the range. Most people here are pretty friendly, and this is coming from someone who moved to SLC from Texas!
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 9:55:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Jarhead_22:
Originally Posted By BYU: Hmmm, let's see, did you read it? Did you compare it to other historical accounts of what happened, or did you just ASSume that it is biased wrongly because it came from a Mormon author on the LDS Church's web site?
View Quote
I read it, and found that it of course paints only the most complimentary picture of the Prophet Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum, as well as of the charges under which they were imprisoned and the circumstances of their deaths. I didn't say it was "biased wrongly," did I? I said that it wasn't an "unimpeachably neutral and independent source," such as one might want to quote when trying to convince a sceptic.
Like I said in my original post-if you really want to know what happened you should either ask a Mormon or do your own independent research. I just provided a link to read another account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo rather than take some revisionist history, cliff-notes version of the story at face value.
View Quote
Revisionism is in the eye of the beholder. I don't have skin in this game, but telling people they can find out "what really happened" in the archives of the Mormon church is assuming quite a bit.
I did not ask that you like it, nor did I assert that it was an independent/neutal account of what happened at Carthage/Nauvoo (even a Marine should be able to figure that out). It is simply another account of what happened, and I found it to be more historically accurate than the revisionist history/cliff-notes version of what that was provided by another poster on this topic.
View Quote
Even a Mormon should be able to figure out that insulting me is not the way to convince me of anything. I'm not anti-Mormon at all. One of my best friends growing up was a Mormon, and he and his parents never treated me as anything less than a member of their family. They never tried to proselytize me or tell me I was going to hell if I didn't get on board.
View Quote
Like I said the first time, if you want to know what happened either ask a Mormon or do independent research. The link was just my way of offering what happened there in my opinion. If I wanted to know what happend, I would go to the source and not to some third-hand, fourth-generation yarn spinner who has an axe to grind. There is no such thing as a unimpeachibly neutral & independent source when it comes to history-there are always at least two sides to every story, and those sides have conflicting points of view. If you do not have skin in this arguement, why are you still here? Skeptic is spelled with a K Jarhead! [;)]
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 10:11:53 AM EDT
Hey I don't have any problems with Mormons or any other sect for that matter. thebeekeeper1 is so correct though, they need to learn some people skills in SLC. One good thing about CJCLDS is the fact they have made it so much easier to do my geneology. If their sincerity to pray over my dead forefathers makes it easy for me to research my family roots, who am I to complain? I have read the Book of Mormon and it's an interesting story. The whole story about how it all came to be is kind of fantastic with the golden tablets and no other witnesses. Where are the tablets today? I don't think anyone else has ever seen them have they? It was pretty much just one guy's word that he had this vision where an angel gave him some gold plates. Has there ever been any physical evidence to corroborate Joseph Smith's claims? The choir is good though. I heard them sing in the tabernacle several years ago. Very talented group.
Link Posted: 5/13/2002 10:26:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/13/2002 10:35:43 AM EDT by Jarhead_22]
Originally Posted By BYU: Like I said the first time, if you want to know what happened either ask a Mormon or do independent research. The link was just my way of offering what happened there in my opinion If I wanted to know what [red]happend[/red], I would go to the source and not to some third-hand, fourth-generation yarn spinner who has an axe to grind.
View Quote
And you don't think that the official history of the Mormon church has an axe to grind?
There is no such thing as a [red]unimpeachibly[/red] neutral & independent source when it comes to history-there are always at least two sides to every story, and those sides have conflicting points of view.
View Quote
Actually, I see it as three sides: The two "truths" told by those involved and the truth that neither of them will admit to.
If you do not have skin in this [red]arguement[/red], why are you still here?
View Quote
What are you trying to say? That I need permission to take part in a discussion that doesn't directly effect me? I'm still here because I'm being addressed, aren't I?
Skeptic is spelled with a K Jarhead!
View Quote
From [url]www.merriam-webster.com[/url]: One entry found for sceptic, sceptical, scepticism. Main Entry: scep·tic, scep·ti·cal, scep·ti·cism variant of SKEPTIC, SKEPTICAL, SKEPTICISM By the way, [red][b]happend[/b][/red] is spelled with an 'e' there in between the 'n' and the 'd,' [red][b]unimpeachibly[/b][/red] is spelled unimpeachably, and [b][red]arguement[/red][/b] is spelled argument, but thanks just the same.
Top Top