Jump to content

Benjamin Seeker

Members
  • Content Count

    714
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

504 Excellent

1 Follower

About Benjamin Seeker

  • Rank
    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

Recent Profile Visitors

1,836 profile views
  1. Science doesn’t back you up there, pretty flower.
  2. I guess my statement was more for other readers than you.
  3. I think it’s important to remember that the Wilford Woodruff quote about god never allowing the church to be lead astray is a single one-time quote, and I’m not sure how important a venue it was given in. Yes, it’s been quoted forever, but it appears to be unproven inherited wisdom at this point.
  4. My comments are also in the closed thread, where I quoted Nelson referring to the original policy as “the will of God,” and giving a general narrative of how it was manifest. Then, in the press release on the recent change to the policy, the mind of God was specifically appealed to.
  5. Of course, bringing up other topics opens up debate, but since you asked: 1. They could have apologized for preaching racism in church-wide venues (such as General Conference). I’m thinking of reasons given for the priesthood ban and prohibitions on interracial marriage. They did disavow those theories on the priesthood ban, which is a great start. 2. More significantly, they could have apologized for the priesthood ban itself. 3. They could have apologized for encouraging gay men to enter heterosexual marriages. I know BYU promoted conversion therapy for gay men, but I’m not sure if the church itself did. If they did, that’s another opportunity for apology. 4. They could have apologized for any harm that the recent exclusion policy may have caused. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples, but these are what came to mind. I’m not suggesting that it’s practical for an institution to apologize for every mistake. However, where there is a hurt community, an apology could go a long way towards healing.
  6. The lack of an apology for anything ever speaks volumes, perhaps.
  7. Happy Easter everyone. I thought I’d try to start a meaningful discussion about Easter. What does it mean to you? For me, I realized today that the experience of Christ’s followers and their brief in his resurrection gives me hope for more than just this mortal life.
  8. Maybe he scries through forum posts to divine the will of God.
  9. I just meant in the modern church. I don’t doubt JS was inspired by these exact type of NT verses in creating his inner circle.
  10. Yeah! The whole big picture.
  11. Actually the idea of an inner circle that knows more than the rest started with JS. Think about polygamy, the anointed quorum, and the council of 50 for really obvious examples. Second anointings have continued up until today according to multiple sources, and they are meant to be entirely secret, so there is at least one topic in which they believe they are meant to know more on a given topic than others. My guess is there is more to the modern inner circle knowledge than just about the second anointing and church finances.
  12. I’m morally opposed to the policy. I generally don’t want to judge people. Circumstances, motives, and beliefs tend to be much too complicated for that.
  13. I’m sure mustard seed will give you details, but you must be aware of the general faith-struggle that thousands of people dealt with in result of the policy. It felt morally wrong. For many it felt wrong to bar children’s baptisms. For example, among my immediate family (parents and siblings), four of six church members were vocally opposed. The dissonance of faith and moral opposition to a revealed policy can of course create doubts, a faith-crisis, or even a complete loss of faith. This was the very real circumstance for thousands of people. I’ve known plenty of people personally who were somewhere on the spectrum I’ve described.
×
×
  • Create New...