ZealouslyStriving

You say 70's and 80's but then you go throwing around 50's and 60's all willy-nilly like. 😉

The self-importance is suffocating.

Or... hear me out... They don't like anything a person has to say on any subject because the author doesn't accept their worldview. I venture to guess most people aren't looking at methodology in their research as a reason to poopoo their ideas. If one is only interested in reading credentialed writers, I believe they will unintentionally miss out on some amazing discoveries that academics will miss because of academic bias towards certain opinions and being insolated among others that think the same.

What the ? 🤨 Just because someone holds a different politically, mostly having to do with a variety of social issues, doesn't mean they don't have the ability to reason. Are you saying that only those that have a political science degree can be trusted? So... if someone doesn't agree with you about abortion, they are a trash researcher about the influence of geometry Muslim religious art?

Don't know... haven't read it yet. But based on the subject matter, I wouldn't think so.

Some people like it- mostly people on the Conservative side of things. Some people don't like it- mostly people on the Liberal side of things. So, basically, it goodness is mostly being based on whether you like Jonah's views on a variety of other things.

One can be sealed to multiple spouses, just not concurrently while all are living. Pres. Oaks is currently in his second sealed marriage and Pres Nelson was also in his second sealed marriage before his passing.

Didn't mean to upset you. I just thought it interesting that NOR, which leans more traditional, Latin Mass supporting, would even allow the discussion if there wasn't some room (however little) for debate. 🤷🏻‍♂️ But what do I know?

What would the time period have to do with the question at hand?

I admire your optimism.

I think the Catholic podcaster who brought him on is the one to really look at. Can you imagine hearing dude's story and thinking, "That is totally awesome, I need to have this cat on my podcast!" ??

I saw a running battle in NOR (New Oxford Review) between Catholics who believe in the absolute "No Marriage in Heaven" crowd and the "Hold On, Let's Explore This" crowd. So I think it's not a totally settled question in Catholicland. Long way of saying... Start a new thread.

Community of Christ has been successfully preventing the Restoration Branches use of old RLDS names/images/etc... that they haven't actively used in decades.

No... like family.

There are two quotes by Joseph, and the rest is opinions by Kimball, Richards, and the authors. Isolate the Joseph quotes and we can discuss their possible meaning.

Because that is what we are taught by prophets of God. No matter how much glory we obtain, God will have yet more glory- because as we advance in glory it adds glory to our Father.

Did I write something that makes you think that I think differently?

Agreed. You can believe what you like. As written and how I understand those terms... Agreed. No objections here. God is a(n) eternal being. The offspring of a(n) eternal being is by nature a(n) eternal being.

And this is why I can't take you seriously.

If I had half his confidence (sans the delusion) I might be willing to step outside my comfort zone and do things I've only thought about. You are taking this topic very seriously.

So, how about this? - The people who like him stop saying he is the best debater to ever live in the history of Mormonism. - The people who don't like him stop saying that he "engage(s) in some of the worst bad faith polemics on social media (especially Twitter/X). He thrives off rage bait and he fancies himself a gatekeeper for the Church..."

I have to say... I kinda admire his bravado- I wish I had half his self-confidence. To think you could take down a 17 million member international Church just by the shear force of your awesome personality takes a heaping extra dose of self-assurance.

It's more accounts that get passed around the members. One is, if I remember correctly, a vision that the kind of matriarch figure in the area of the country had- so it's more a localized thing. I don't remember much about the other one. I'll try to do some searching, but I'm not super hopeful that I'll find it.

Let's consider the logic... He couldn't convince Institute students of the "truth", but thought our highly educated Church leaders would be completely duped by his ruse.

*Dude seriously believes his false testimony would be so convincing that the Church would pay him to move to Utah and he would be able to work his way up to become President of the Church. ** 🤣