I think what he means is that mormon concept of Zion/New Jerusalem cannot be brought about by someone with his standing in the mormon church. It would need to be initiated by the leaders of the church who presumably act in God's name. In fact, the ___location of the New Jerusalem has already been prophesied. It is supposed to be built up in Missouri. It was already started but never finished. You can go and see where the corner stones for the temples were placed decades ago but never completed. It doesn't mean this guy can't create a nice community but it will never be Zion in the mormon sense of the word.
Source: I was raised mormon and my family used to go visit the ___location where Zion was to be created.
I don't think it necessarily has to be initiated top-down. But the thing is that this is nothing like Zion, except that it resembles an old drawing. The physical layout of Zion is an unimportant implementation detail. Not only does Hall have no authority, but he also, as far as I know, has not expressed any intention for this to be an attempt at real Zion, and even if he had, it wouldn't matter. One man can't make Zion by himself. Not even the President of the Church can do that, which is abundantly clear from a cursory review of Smith's biography. It requires a people that so fully live the principles of the Celestial Kingdom that divine beings can take up residence among them (see D&C 105:5 [0]). Hall may believe he has found a great city layout in the archives of the Church, and if so, more power to him, but this all has no relation to the real Zion, which is the pure in heart. That's why I keep saying these have nothing to do with each other, except that Hall is copying an old drawing by Smith.
If someone was making a serious attempt at building Zion, they would do so by committing themselves to teaching the pure doctrine, engaging in as much service as possible, helping other people fix their economic woes in a self-sufficient, sustainable manner that doesn't necessitate a patron (which basically means supplying the basics while they learn an in-demand skill), and so on. In short, they would do all the things the Church is already doing. All an individual can do is seek to augment that.
So, again, while Hall's project is admirable, it has no relation to Zion, because Zion is Zion only once a heavenly people inhabit it. It's not about building a city out to a certain spec.
Edit: I guess I partially disagree. In order for you to be a 'True Believing Mormon' you would not be able to embark on a project as large as creating Zion/New Jerusalem without the express permission/mandate from the first presidency. Anything outside of this would make you an apostate in their eyes. I don't necessarily subscribe to all of that but the rules are clear within the church proper.
>In order for you to be a 'True Believing Mormon' you would not be able to embark on a project as large as creating Zion/New Jerusalem without the express permission/mandate from the first presidency. Anything outside of this would make you an apostate in their eyes. I don't necessarily subscribe to all of that but the rules are clear within the church proper.
I don't think this is correct. Everyone is a participant in creating the New Jerusalem insofar as they working to make themselves and those around them more heavenly.
The physical buildings and structure are practically an afterthought. They'll come into being once the people who can live there exist. I don't believe that there will be a call out or a "project" embarked upon per se; I know a lot of Mormons expect the prophet to say "We're going to Missouri" out of the blue one day, but I don't think it will happen that way. Even in Joseph Smith's day, when proclamations along those lines did occur, the process was long and gradual, and ultimately used to facilitate the journey out to the Saints' settling place in Utah. Saints who expected immediate redemption were quickly and repeatedly disappointed. It will be the same way with the New Jerusalem. It will be built gradually, almost without being noticed.
I believe the people will continue improving, begin by happenstance to converge in the appointed place, and the city will spring up around it (this is especially plausible if you believe other End Times revelation that indicates people will be forced to flee most populated places). Temples will be built to accommodate the population. Eventually the Church will move HQ there. Around this time there may be a formal call or encouragement for people to come out to the center place in a reasonable, orderly manner, as they're able.
Yes, the Priesthood has to be involved to a certain extent, but that part will occur automatically as the people qualify. We already see that with temple building; the First Presidency designates places for new temples if they believe the Saints are qualified to care for one. The same pattern will be followed here. As the people in this place improve, the Law of Consecration will begin to be practiced, the people's hearts will be prepared, and the Church will facilitate it within its existing structure by expanding the relevant bishopric's responsibilities to the full breadth of their scriptural mandate.
So yes, the Priesthood has to be there to provide some of the edifices and oversee some of the practices. But it will be there once the people are ready, and it's not going to happen all at once.
The only way that anyone can actually work to build Zion is to make themselves, and work to influence those around them to be, worthy to live there.
I'm as TBM as they come, so if you have contradictory evidence, I'd be interested in reviewing it.
Source: I was raised mormon and my family used to go visit the ___location where Zion was to be created.