Houston Temple Flooded

[aspietroll]

It is a taste of what is to come and those in the Gulf will need to bugout when the tribulations come as the gulf will open up all the way to the great lakes and make a sea way to Zion the New Jerusalem. The city of Enoch will also give a bit of a splash when it returns.

My wife showed me a FaceBook page a few days ago where the Huston temple presidency were asking members to pray for the temple. My thought was sitting around and just praying is not going to save the temple, Get the members to build a wall of sandbags around the temple or get an excavator and dig a trench with a bund around the temple, yes it would destroy the temple gardens but not the temple itself. Faith without works is dead. I do a lot of work with water management and bunding as part of my profession and find it very strange that no effort was made to save the temple -- perhaps road access was not available and the members were all trying to save themselves or there places of employment which is bigger priority.

I also wondered why no sandbags were placed around the temple. I concluded that they must have been taking care of their own homes and families. I doubt they were taking care of their workplace though.

If we had a hundred people sandbagging around the temple that might look a little weird too given the entire situation. Couldn't have asked the men to leave and attend to it at a time like that.....but, I believe they had a few days to prepare.

Just placing sandbags in a block around the front door would have only taken an hour.

I'm pretty sure it takes more than a few sandbags around the door to hold off flooding of this magnitude.

I think some don't understand just how serious the flooding is in Houston. I think LDS in the area were more worried about saving lives than expending their energies to save a building. I think that if members has been spending their time/resources/energy trying to save the temple, while the people in their community needed to be rescued and fed and cared for, it would have been an example of misplaced priorities and would not engender goodwill. The temple is the Lord's house. If he wanted to protect it from flood waters, he could have, but since it flooded, I don't think it suited his purposes and as smallfarm pointed out, it could have ended up being a source of contention if the temple had remained untouched and was not opened up to refugees. But since it's flooded, it will remain closed. Maybe the flooding will not be too bad for the cleanup--and maybe it needs some retrofitting or other updates which can now be done.

Yes, that's what I hope happened in real life, that work was spent saving lives. From an outsider's view, the opinion of the OP is disturbing. "Is the destruction of this Temple result of not enough of us being religious enough." This is a superstitious attitude. Religion is a way to help the person withstand suffering. Suffering is often the result of the reality that nothing lasts forever.

The opinion of OP is disturbing because it's a style of thinking within the LDS church that is similar to superstition. While not uniform, it is prevalent enough that it's a characteristic of the church.

[AI2.0]

It is a taste of what is to come and those in the Gulf will need to bugout when the tribulations come as the gulf will open up all the way to the great lakes and make a sea way to Zion the New Jerusalem. The city of Enoch will also give a bit of a splash when it returns.

My wife showed me a FaceBook page a few days ago where the Huston temple presidency were asking members to pray for the temple. My thought was sitting around and just praying is not going to save the temple, Get the members to build a wall of sandbags around the temple or get an excavator and dig a trench with a bund around the temple, yes it would destroy the temple gardens but not the temple itself. Faith without works is dead. I do a lot of work with water management and bunding as part of my profession and find it very strange that no effort was made to save the temple -- perhaps road access was not available and the members were all trying to save themselves or there places of employment which is bigger priority.

I also wondered why no sandbags were placed around the temple. I concluded that they must have been taking care of their own homes and families. I doubt they were taking care of their workplace though.

If we had a hundred people sandbagging around the temple that might look a little weird too given the entire situation. Couldn't have asked the men to leave and attend to it at a time like that.....but, I believe they had a few days to prepare.

Just placing sandbags in a block around the front door would have only taken an hour.

I'm pretty sure it takes more than a few sandbags around the door to hold off flooding of this magnitude.

I think some don't understand just how serious the flooding is in Houston. I think LDS in the area were more worried about saving lives than expending their energies to save a building. I think that if members has been spending their time/resources/energy trying to save the temple, while the people in their community needed to be rescued and fed and cared for, it would have been an example of misplaced priorities and would not engender goodwill. The temple is the Lord's house. If he wanted to protect it from flood waters, he could have, but since it flooded, I don't think it suited his purposes and as smallfarm pointed out, it could have ended up being a source of contention if the temple had remained untouched and was not opened up to refugees. But since it's flooded, it will remain closed. Maybe the flooding will not be too bad for the cleanup--and maybe it needs some retrofitting or other updates which can now be done.

Yes, that's what I hope happened in real life, that work was spent saving lives. From an outsider's view, the opinion of the OP is disturbing. "Is the destruction of this Temple result of not enough of us being religious enough." This is a superstitious attitude. Religion is a way to help the person withstand suffering. Suffering is often the result of the reality that nothing lasts forever.

The opinion of OP is disturbing because it's a style of thinking within the LDS church that is similar to superstition. While not uniform, it is prevalent enough that it's a characteristic of the church.

I agree. But it is investigator and I'm not sure where he/she stands so it could be the post is playing Devil's advocate, trying to get devout members to agree that it is divine retribution--implying that LDS members will take this superstitious stance. Me--I don't believe it for a minute--the church isn't being punished, it's a natural disaster and it's hitting a large swath of good, evil and everything in between people. These things happen and communities who suffer work to get through it and make the best of it.

[Z2100]

I also wondered why no sandbags were placed around the temple. I concluded that they must have been taking care of their own homes and families. I doubt they were taking care of their workplace though.

If we had a hundred people sandbagging around the temple that might look a little weird too given the entire situation. Couldn't have asked the men to leave and attend to it at a time like that.....but, I believe they had a few days to prepare.

Just placing sandbags in a block around the front door would have only taken an hour.

I'm pretty sure it takes more than a few sandbags around the door to hold off flooding of this magnitude.

I think some don't understand just how serious the flooding is in Houston. I think LDS in the area were more worried about saving lives than expending their energies to save a building. I think that if members has been spending their time/resources/energy trying to save the temple, while the people in their community needed to be rescued and fed and cared for, it would have been an example of misplaced priorities and would not engender goodwill. The temple is the Lord's house. If he wanted to protect it from flood waters, he could have, but since it flooded, I don't think it suited his purposes and as smallfarm pointed out, it could have ended up being a source of contention if the temple had remained untouched and was not opened up to refugees. But since it's flooded, it will remain closed. Maybe the flooding will not be too bad for the cleanup--and maybe it needs some retrofitting or other updates which can now be done.

Yes, that's what I hope happened in real life, that work was spent saving lives. From an outsider's view, the opinion of the OP is disturbing. "Is the destruction of this Temple result of not enough of us being religious enough." This is a superstitious attitude. Religion is a way to help the person withstand suffering. Suffering is often the result of the reality that nothing lasts forever.

The opinion of OP is disturbing because it's a style of thinking within the LDS church that is similar to superstition. While not uniform, it is prevalent enough that it's a characteristic of the church.

I agree. But it is investigator and I'm not sure where he/she stands so it could be the post is playing Devil's advocate, trying to get devout members to agree that it is divine retribution--implying that LDS members will take this superstitious stance. Me--I don't believe it for a minute--the church isn't being punished, it's a natural disaster and it's hitting a large swath of good, evil and everything in between people. These things happen and communities who suffer work to get through it and make the best of it.

This world is a Telestial one. Everyone will suffer and everyone is a child of God

[aspietroll]

I also wondered why no sandbags were placed around the temple. I concluded that they must have been taking care of their own homes and families. I doubt they were taking care of their workplace though.

If we had a hundred people sandbagging around the temple that might look a little weird too given the entire situation. Couldn't have asked the men to leave and attend to it at a time like that.....but, I believe they had a few days to prepare.

Just placing sandbags in a block around the front door would have only taken an hour.

I'm pretty sure it takes more than a few sandbags around the door to hold off flooding of this magnitude.

I think some don't understand just how serious the flooding is in Houston. I think LDS in the area were more worried about saving lives than expending their energies to save a building. I think that if members has been spending their time/resources/energy trying to save the temple, while the people in their community needed to be rescued and fed and cared for, it would have been an example of misplaced priorities and would not engender goodwill. The temple is the Lord's house. If he wanted to protect it from flood waters, he could have, but since it flooded, I don't think it suited his purposes and as smallfarm pointed out, it could have ended up being a source of contention if the temple had remained untouched and was not opened up to refugees. But since it's flooded, it will remain closed. Maybe the flooding will not be too bad for the cleanup--and maybe it needs some retrofitting or other updates which can now be done.

Yes, that's what I hope happened in real life, that work was spent saving lives. From an outsider's view, the opinion of the OP is disturbing. "Is the destruction of this Temple result of not enough of us being religious enough." This is a superstitious attitude. Religion is a way to help the person withstand suffering. Suffering is often the result of the reality that nothing lasts forever.

The opinion of OP is disturbing because it's a style of thinking within the LDS church that is similar to superstition. While not uniform, it is prevalent enough that it's a characteristic of the church.

I agree. But it is investigator and I'm not sure where he/she stands so it could be the post is playing Devil's advocate, trying to get devout members to agree that it is divine retribution--implying that LDS members will take this superstitious stance. Me--I don't believe it for a minute--the church isn't being punished, it's a natural disaster and it's hitting a large swath of good, evil and everything in between people. These things happen and communities who suffer work to get through it and make the best of it.

The first thing that really made me see superstition in the church is a missionary telling a bunch of people in a church that tithing will directly result in you getting a promotion or some other lucky break.

[Arenera]

I also wondered why no sandbags were placed around the temple. I concluded that they must have been taking care of their own homes and families. I doubt they were taking care of their workplace though.

If we had a hundred people sandbagging around the temple that might look a little weird too given the entire situation. Couldn't have asked the men to leave and attend to it at a time like that.....but, I believe they had a few days to prepare.

Just placing sandbags in a block around the front door would have only taken an hour.

I'm pretty sure it takes more than a few sandbags around the door to hold off flooding of this magnitude.

I think some don't understand just how serious the flooding is in Houston. I think LDS in the area were more worried about saving lives than expending their energies to save a building. I think that if members has been spending their time/resources/energy trying to save the temple, while the people in their community needed to be rescued and fed and cared for, it would have been an example of misplaced priorities and would not engender goodwill. The temple is the Lord's house. If he wanted to protect it from flood waters, he could have, but since it flooded, I don't think it suited his purposes and as smallfarm pointed out, it could have ended up being a source of contention if the temple had remained untouched and was not opened up to refugees. But since it's flooded, it will remain closed. Maybe the flooding will not be too bad for the cleanup--and maybe it needs some retrofitting or other updates which can now be done.

Yes, that's what I hope happened in real life, that work was spent saving lives. From an outsider's view, the opinion of the OP is disturbing. "Is the destruction of this Temple result of not enough of us being religious enough." This is a superstitious attitude. Religion is a way to help the person withstand suffering. Suffering is often the result of the reality that nothing lasts forever.

The opinion of OP is disturbing because it's a style of thinking within the LDS church that is similar to superstition. While not uniform, it is prevalent enough that it's a characteristic of the church.

I agree. But it is investigator and I'm not sure where he/she stands so it could be the post is playing Devil's advocate, trying to get devout members to agree that it is divine retribution--implying that LDS members will take this superstitious stance. Me--I don't believe it for a minute--the church isn't being punished, it's a natural disaster and it's hitting a large swath of good, evil and everything in between people. These things happen and communities who suffer work to get through it and make the best of it.

Investigator is remnant.

I would much rather have the Yellow Helping Hands help clean up the Houston Temple then have the John Doe and Soul Mates challenges that the Remnants and the Denver Church have to deal with.