Jump to content

Nauvoo Sealings Adoptions and Anointings by Lisle Brown


kamenraider

Recommended Posts

I've posted this quote here before regarding a connection between plural marriage and second anointings:

There was a time when the patriarchal priesthood and second anointings were conferred only upon those who had entered into the practice of plural marriage.

--Apostle Marriner W. Merrill, Tues. June 24, 1902, at a quarterly conference of the Twelve at the SLC Temple, quoted in: A Ministry of Meetings: The Apostolic Diaries of Rudger Clawson, by Stan Larson, ed., SLC: Signature Books, 1993, p. 454.

I recently came across another similar one relating to the Nauvoo era:

In the Winter of 1845 meetings were held all over the city of Nauvoo, and the spirit of Elijah was taught in the different families as a foundation to the order of celestial marriage, as well as the law of adoption. Many families entered into covenants with each other -- the man to stand by his wife and the woman to cleave unto her husband, and the children to be adopted to the parents. I was one of those who entered into covenants to stand by my family, to cleave to them through time and eternity. I [John D. Lee] am proud to say I have kept my obligations sacred and inviolate to this day.

...

The ordinance of celestial marriage was extensively practiced by men and women who had covenanted to live together, and a few men had dispensations granted them to enter into plural marriages, which were taught to be the stepping-stone to celestial exaltation. Without plural marriage a man could not attain to the fullness of the holy priesthood and be made equal to our Saviour.

--Mormonism Unveiled by John D. Lee (with William Warner Bishop), St. Louis, Mo: M. E. Mason 1891, pgs. 165-166.

This got me curious. I consulted Lisle Brown's book Nauvoo Sealings Adoptions and Anointings and cross checked the listed recipients of second anointings in Nauvoo with familysearch.org to see what I would find. This is what I found:

-Polygamous Nauvoo Second Anointings:

James Allred

William Anderson

Elisha Averett

Almon Babbitt

Israel Barlow

John Benbow

Ezra T. Benson

Samuel Bent

John Bernhisel

Benjamin Brown

James Brown

Harrison Burgess

John M. Burk

Reynolds Cahoon

William Cahoon

Simeon Carter

Ezra Chase

Isaac Chase

Benjamin Clapp

Raymond Clark

William Clayton

Joseph Coolidge

Frederick Cox

Alpheus Cutler

Hiram Dayton

Philo Dibble

Simeon Dunn

Winslow Farr

William Felshaw

Joseph Fielding

Elijah Fordham

Lucian Foster

Jacob Foutz

David Fullmer

John Fullmer

Jacob Gates

Stephen Goddard

George Grant

Harvey Green

John P. Greene

Thomas Grover

Solomon Hancock

Jesse Harmon

Peter Haws

Henry Herriman

John Herrington

Isaac Higbee

Jonathan Holmes

Edward Hunter

William Huntington Sr.

William D. Huntington

Orson Hyde

Aaron Johnson

Joseph Kelting

Heber C. Kimball

Joseph Kingsbury

Joseph Knight Sr.

Newell Knight

John D. Lee

Cornelius Lott

Amasa Lyman

Duncan McArthur

George Miller

William Miller

Isaac Morley

William Murray

Joseph B. Noble

John Page

John Parker

Hezekiah Peck

William W. Phelps

William Pitt

Orson Pratt

Parley Pratt

Charles C. Rich

Franklin D. Richards

Levi Richards

Willard Richards

Albert P. Rockwood

John Scott

Lucuis Scovil

Perrigrine Sessions

Henry G. Sherwood

Charles Shumway

Don Carlos Smith

George A. Smith

Hyrum Smith

John Smith

Joseph Smith

Abraham Smoot

Erastus Snow

Lorenzo Snow

Willard Snow

William Snow

Daniel Spencer

Hiram Spencer

Orson Spencer

Levi Stewart

John Tanner

John Taylor

Alvah Tippets

Theodore Turley

Clark Whitney

Newell K. Whitney

Jeremiah Willey

Lewis Wilson

Stephen Winchester

Lucian Woodworth

Edwin Woolley

David Yearsley

Brigham Young

Lorenzo Young

Joseph Young

-Monogamous Nauvoo Second Anointings

of Eventual Known Polygamists:

Randolph Alexander

Isaac Allred

Milo Andrus

Truman Angell

Jesse Baker

Edson Barney

Royal Barney Jr.

Titus Billings

Charles Bird

Thomas Burd!ck (MADB auto censorship wouldn't let me spell this name correctly)

William Burton

Daniel Carn

William Davis

John Eldridge

Augustus Farnham

Elisha Groves

Levi Hancock

James Hendricks

Joseph Heywood

Chandler Holbrook

Joseph Hovey

Heman Hyde

William Hyde

Norton Jacobs

Lyman Leonard

John Lytle

Wandle Mace

William Major

Moses Martin

James Pace

Abraham Palmer

Calvin Pendleton

Joseph Rich

Phinehas Richards

Lewis Robbins

Miles Romney

Shadrach Roundy

Asahel Smith

James Smithies

John J. Tanner

Nathan Tanner

Sidney Tanner

James Taylor

Charles Wandell

Horace K. Whitney

Samuel Williams

-Other Monogamous Second Anointings-

James Bell (Dead - Hezekiah Peck as proxy)

Peter Fullmer ( 74 years old. Daughter Desdemona md. Joseph Smith in 1842)

George W. Harris (Excommunicated in 1852. Wife Lucinda md. Joseph Smith)

Joshua Holman (Died later that year in Nov. 1846)

Andrew Lytle

Noah Packard

Thomas Pearson (died 1856 Hillsboro, OR)

Samuel Rolfe

Ransom Shepard

Lyman Sherman (Dead - proxy Almon Babbitt)

Samuel Whitney (Died Mar. 1846)

William Weeks (Left the Church - obituary in 1857 said "...he was not a follower of Brigham Young and did not believe in polygamy")

James Whitehead (Left the Church - joined RLDS)

It looks like those who never practiced plural marriage (and who were living, and did not leave the Church) represent a very small percentage of the total number of recipients of second anointings. I wonder why?

Link to comment

Just off the cuff I noted some errors in the list. Some of that might be because history repeats itself and you got the wrong sequence. Newel K. Whitney was not a polygamist until afterwards. He was however aware of it and condoned his daughter's marriage to Joseph Smith.

William Marks perhaps should be listed but isn't, I ca see why he wouldn't necessarily make official roles.

I do not have much of a list of the Utah period which didn't resume until 1867 in the Endowment House, but I suspect L. John Nuttal was not pluraly married at the time. I think under John Taylor there was a renewed effort in the early 1880's to make polygamy a requirement for church leaders, school of the prophets type participation. and by extension, other things. After that I suspect apostle Moses Thatcher was another notable exception.

Another case study would be from the Sweetwater rescue:

When President Brigham Young heard of this heroic act, he wept like a child, and later declared publicly,

?That act alone will ensure C. Allen Huntington, George W. Grant, and David P. Kimball an everlasting salvation

in the Celestial Kingdom of God, worlds without end? ?

(Handcarts to Zion [Glendale, CA: The Arthur Clark Co., 1960], pp. 132-33).

http://byustudies.by...c/45.3Orton.pdf see page 29-32

Orton also shows that the quote comes up rather late (1914) but finds a few items from early times that suggest Brigham had a high opinion of the boys. So there is a potential that this is Solomon Kimball's "rhetorical excess" and not Brigham Young's. It could have been based on family oral tradition that became more grandiose as time past.

If there is reason to doubt the instance I would prefer to see dismissed on that basis, rather than what would then be theological difficulties. But Orton took a harmonizing approach rather than a form critical approach. I can see why he might want to be careful, given the quote's popularity in lesson manuals.

His theological analysis lacks sophistication, but I wonder if BYU Studies editors would have cut stuff out. He brings out a few endure to the end quotes. He shows that David (the OT king) lost his exaltation (through murder). He doesn't bring up that murder (along with apostasy, adultery, denying the Holy Ghost) are the small set of sins that can nullify one's election. He treats all promises as being strongly conditioned such as those found in patriarchal blessings about obtaining eternal life. Interestingly, Joseph F. Smith had to correct patriarchs back in the 50s, I think, because they were not explicitly stating it was conditioned on continued faithfulness.

Here is one formulation of the calling and election made sure qualifications that I think the Sweetwater rescuers could have conceivably met:

?After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure.? (Teachings, p. 150.)

<a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1"'>http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1" target="_blank">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

Likewise some of the valiant defenders of Zion were so honored.

John A. Peterson, Warren Snow, A Man in Between: The Biography of a Mormon Defender MA Thesis 1985

Warren led one campaign after another throughout the spring, summer, and fall of 1866. When he was not chasing indians, he was organizing troops holding inspections raising cash to buy weapons building forts and closing down weaker settlements and relocating their inhabitants. His role as a defender consumed all of his time and his constant exertions in the long mountain rides as well as the pressures of commandeering his district began to wear him down and his health deteriorated. He was on the verge of physical collapse, yet he continued to work at full capacity until winter snows ended Black Hawks forages for the year. But his defensive efforts continued to keep him in good stead with Brigham Young and on January 17, 1867, Warren and a handful of other Nauvoo Legion officers including William B. Pace, Robert T. Burton, Thomas Callister, and Aaron Johnson received .... the Salt Lake Endowment House. (p. 170)

So I suggest that polygamy wasn't, in practice, strictly required for the church to recognize one would be exalted. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

Link to comment

I do not believe a person can be exalted without receiving the ordinance of the Second Anointing, otherwise the ordinance world have no purpose. Likewise I do not believe a person can be exalted without entering into celestial wifery.

There are several things I sense in this post...sincerity is not one of them.

Link to comment

It looks like those who never practiced plural marriage (and who were living, and did not leave the Church) represent a very small percentage of the total number of recipients of second anointings. I wonder why?

Perhaps because many of the people who were "eligible" for a Second Anointing were also asked to participate in polygamy.

Nice to see your obsession continues.

Link to comment

Just off the cuff I noted some errors in the list. Some of that might be because history repeats itself and you got the wrong sequence. Newel K. Whitney was not a polygamist until afterwards. He was however aware of it and condoned his daughter's marriage to Joseph Smith.

According to the book, Newel K. Whitney was sealed to five deceased women in 1844.

William Marks perhaps should be listed but isn't, I ca see why he wouldn't necessarily make official roles.

Good point. The book doesn't have an entry in the "SA" (second anointing) column for him, but I'm not sure why because it mentions that he had received it in a footnote. It also mentions that he left Nauvoo in 1845. He didn't support Brigham Young after Joseph Smith's martyrdom, and so was removed as Pres. of the Nauvoo Stake.

I do not have much of a list of the Utah period which didn't resume until 1867 in the Endowment House, but I suspect L. John Nuttal was not pluraly married at the time. I think under John Taylor there was a renewed effort in the early 1880's to make polygamy a requirement for church leaders, school of the prophets type participation. and by extension, other things. After that I suspect apostle Moses Thatcher was another notable exception.

Well I was really focusing on Nauvoo here, but...

L. John Nuttall was a polygamist -- he married Elizabeth Clarkson in 1856 and John Taylor's daughter Sophia in 1875 (while Elizabeth was still living, btw). Elizabeth died in 1902 and Sophia in 1909.

Moses Thatcher was a polygamist. He married Celestia Farr in 1861, Lydia Clayton in 1868, and Georgina Snow in 1885.

Another case study would be from the Sweetwater rescue:

When President Brigham Young heard of this heroic act, he wept like a child, and later declared publicly,

?That act alone will ensure C. Allen Huntington, George W. Grant, and David P. Kimball an everlasting salvation

in the Celestial Kingdom of God, worlds without end? ?

(Handcarts to Zion [Glendale, CA: The Arthur Clark Co., 1960], pp. 132-33).

http://byustudies.by...c/45.3Orton.pdf see page 29-32

Orton also shows that the quote comes up rather late (1914) but finds a few items from early times that suggest Brigham had a high opinion of the boys. So there is a potential that this is Solomon Kimball's "rhetorical excess" and not Brigham Young's. It could have been based on family oral tradition that became more grandiose as time past.

If there is reason to doubt the instance I would prefer to see dismissed on that basis, rather than what would then be theological difficulties. But Orton took a harmonizing approach rather than a form critical approach. I can see why he might want to be careful, given the quote's popularity in lesson manuals.

His theological analysis lacks sophistication, but I wonder if BYU Studies editors would have cut stuff out. He brings out a few endure to the end quotes. He shows that David (the OT king) lost his exaltation (through murder). He doesn't bring up that murder (along with apostasy, adultery, denying the Holy Ghost) are the small set of sins that can nullify one's election. He treats all promises as being strongly conditioned such as those found in patriarchal blessings about obtaining eternal life. Interestingly, Joseph F. Smith had to correct patriarchs back in the 50s, I think, because they were not explicitly stating it was conditioned on continued faithfulness.

Here is one formulation of the calling and election made sure qualifications that I think the Sweetwater rescuers could have conceivably met:

?After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure.? (Teachings, p. 150.)

<a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1"'>http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1" target="_blank">http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=6f72fd758096b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

Likewise some of the valiant defenders of Zion were so honored.

John A. Peterson, Warren Snow, A Man in Between: The Biography of a Mormon Defender MA Thesis 1985

Warren led one campaign after another throughout the spring, summer, and fall of 1866. When he was not chasing indians, he was organizing troops holding inspections raising cash to buy weapons building forts and closing down weaker settlements and relocating their inhabitants. His role as a defender consumed all of his time and his constant exertions in the long mountain rides as well as the pressures of commandeering his district began to wear him down and his health deteriorated. He was on the verge of physical collapse, yet he continued to work at full capacity until winter snows ended Black Hawks forages for the year. But his defensive efforts continued to keep him in good stead with Brigham Young and on January 17, 1867, Warren and a handful of other Nauvoo Legion officers including William B. Pace, Robert T. Burton, Thomas Callister, and Aaron Johnson received .... the Salt Lake Endowment House. (p. 170)

So I suggest that polygamy wasn't, in practice, strictly required for the church to recognize one would be exalted. "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends."

As far as those boys were concerned, "everlasting salvation in the Celestial Kingdom of God, worlds without end" is not necessarily the same thing as exaltation in the celestial kingdom and eternal lives.

As far as Warren Snow, William B. Pace, Robert T. Burton, Thomas Callister, and Aaron Johnson are concerned, they were all polygamists at the time, except for William B. Pace, and he married a second wife in 1880.

Link to comment

Perhaps because many of the people who were "eligible" for a Second Anointing were also asked to participate in polygamy.

Yeah, there seems to be a connection there.

Nice to see your obsession continues.

Do you want to talk about second anointings in Nauvoo, or do you want to talk about me?

I make a pretty fascinating subject, if I do say so myself, but that'd have to be the subject of another thread...

:P Oh shoot -- I just remembered -- personal threads aren't allowed here.

Link to comment

According to the book, Newel K. Whitney was sealed to five deceased women in 1844.

Then my observation stands, as Newel was not a polygamist (even by the low standard of posthumous sealings) in 1843.

L. John Nuttall was a polygamist -- he married Elizabeth Clarkson in 1856 and John Taylor's daughter Sophia in 1875 (while Elizabeth was still living, btw). Elizabeth died in 1902 and Sophia in 1909.

1867 comes before 1875.

Moses Thatcher was a polygamist. He married Celestia Farr in 1861, Lydia Clayton in 1868, and Georgina Snow in 1885.

Thanks for the correction. Looking over my notes it looks like I confused Thatcher with other apostles brought in in the 1880s. I stumbled on some of my old notes on the subject:

Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions p. 180-182. Quinn has a nice chart on p. 181

Here is an interesting paragraph on p. 182 :

Although ten monogamous general authorities appointed between 1845 and 1899 married plural wives eventually, several took years to do so despite the social and ecclesiastical pressure. Prominent among the early procrastinators were the Presiding Patriarch John Smith (b. 1832), who waited exactly two years after his ordination to marry a plural wife, and Seventy's president Jedediah M. Grant, who delayed more than three years. Even more interesting was the fact that despite President Taylor's public demands, he advanced five monogamists to the hierarchy (Heber J. Grant, Seymour B. Young, John Q. Cannon, John W. Taylor, and William W. Taylor.) By the 1882 revelation, President Taylor required Grant and Young to enter plural marriage, which they did within two years. However, Taylor's son William remained a monogamist from his appointment in 1880 until shortly before his death in 1884. Morever John Q. Cannon and John W. Taylor wanted to enter "the patriarchal order of marriage," but President Taylor refused to allow them to do so in order to protect them from the jeopardy of arrest.
John W. Taylor did not marry polygamously until 1888, four years after his appointment as apostle.

To summarize:

Apostles ordained as monogamists:

Heber J. Grant (1882)*

John W. Taylor (1884)**

Anthon H. Lund (1889)

*became polygamous 2 years after call

**became polygamous 4 years after call

Individuals that received honor before being married polygamously:

Part 1. According to Andrew Ehat's Table p. 102-103 (Master's Thesis)

Newell K. Whitney

George Miller*

Amasa Lyman

John Smith

Reynolds Cahoon*

Alphaeus Cutler*

Wilford Woodruff

George A. Smith

Cornelius P. Lott*

William Wines Phelps*

Isaac Morley*

Joseph Young

Lucy Mack Smith

*Ehat notes: * = activity on or before date given

So those individuals may not belong on the list.

As far as those boys were concerned, "everlasting salvation in the Celestial Kingdom of God, worlds without end" is not necessarily the same thing as exaltation in the celestial kingdom and eternal lives.

Maybe. I would have to shown otherwise with pre-1914 quotes. In references I have encountered "Worlds without end" is pretty much synonymous with eternal increase and hence exaltation though.

I am curious as to whether Brown or any one else has found the boys' names on the list. I feel confident that David P. Kimball should be there and that Solomon Kimball was relying on family traditions.

As far as Warren Snow, William B. Pace, Robert T. Burton, Thomas Callister, and Aaron Johnson are concerned, they were all polygamists at the time, except for William B. Pace, and he married a second wife in 1880.

Excellent. I will add Pace to list with Nuttal as men who distinguished themselves as valiant defenders of Zion and recognized as such by receiving the highest honors the church can give before becoming polygamists. I knew about the some of others likely being polygamists. Johnson should show up on Nauvoo lists as well. What is interesting in the passage is that the men were recognized because they were defenders (willing to sacrifice their lives) and plural marriage appears to be coincidental this.

Link to comment
There was a time when the patriarchal priesthood and second anointings were conferred only upon those who had entered into the practice of plural marriage.
There was a time when people were sealed to church leaders instead of their own parents, baptized more than once and other practices that have changed over time, often due to additional revelation.

Even if polygamists were always a majority of second anointings, as long as some were monogamous, I don't see how this indicates anything about the final state of monogamy or plural marriage in the eternities.

Link to comment

kamenraider,

Do you happen to know what the overall ratio of monogamous marriages to polygamous marriages was during that time frame?

Sorry, I overlooked your post.

In 1845 the Church had around 30,000 members. The population of Nauvoo was around 12,000.

The page for George D. Smith's book Nauvoo Polygamy on signaturebooks.com says "By early 1846, nearly 200 men had adopted the polygamous lifestyle, with an average of nearly four women per man -- 717 wives in all."

The Encyclopedia of Mormonism article "Plural Marriage" estimates that only 20 to 25 percent of LDS adults were members of polygamous households. By comparison, the Encyclopedia also says (4:1533) that in the U.S., where the percentage is the highest, only 30 percent of homes with at least one LDS member had a temple marriage at that time (1992).

Link to comment

mormon fool,

I don't believe that plural marriage was a prerequisite for the second anointing. I realize that the first quote in my original post seems to imply that, but I was trying to examine the idea that plural marriage was necessarily associated with receipt of the fullness of the priesthood, as the John D. Lee quote mentioned.

IIRC, Parley P. Pratt received his second anointing by himself because he did not have a wife sealed to him for eternity at that point (only one for time), but I wouldn't try to argue from that that we don't need to be married in the temple. It was undserstood that he'd soon be sealed for time and eternity to another wife or wives. Likewise, I think it was understood by monogamists who received the second anointing that they would eventually need to fulfill all the laws, etc., pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant of marriage.

Link to comment

There was a time when people were sealed to church leaders instead of their own parents, baptized more than once and other practices that have changed over time, often due to additional revelation.

Even if polygamists were always a majority of second anointings, as long as some were monogamous, I don't see how this indicates anything about the final state of monogamy or plural marriage in the eternities.

I think it's the percentages of monogamous vs. eventual polygamous recipients here that might be indicative.

Link to comment

Do you mean like psychically sense. . ? as in your can psychically sense sincerity in internet postings. . ?

As in I can put 2 and 2 together...or let me be more clear - the post to which I was referring, if sincere, would be totally inconsistent with just about anything else you've posted on this board. So, that leaves two options - 1) someone else was using your login; or 2) you didn't really mean what you were saying. Which is it?

Link to comment

As in I can put 2 and 2 together...or let me be more clear - the post to which I was referring, if sincere, would be totally inconsistent with just about anything else you've posted on this board. So, that leaves two options - 1) someone else was using your login; or 2) you didn't really mean what you were saying. Which is it?

I assumed she was being sincere. What other statement was her post inconsistent with?

Link to comment

She is generally critical of the Church. If I am confusing her with someone else, I will gladly apologize.

Just a couple:

Post Link 1

Post Link 2

Post Link 3

I stand by what I typed. Quote Eden*: "I do not believe a person can be exalted without receiving the ordinance of the Second Anointing, otherwise the ordinance would have no purpose. Likewise I do not believe a person can be exalted without entering into celestial wifery."

ttribe if you can fault the above belief of mine by providing evidence to the contrary I would be greatly interested. I honestly believe the above statement to be true, after thoroughly researching the topic for more than a decade.

As for being critical of the church, you are mistaken. What I do believe and I hold as my philosophy is that the apologetic approach held by the majority of the members of the church and it's apologists is dead wrong. I believe that being honest and open in apologetics is the best solution, while this may leave the church damaged and vunerable in the short term, I believe in the long term the wisdom of this approach would be beneficial and would leave the church in a better condition for futurity as the truth always shines through in the end, that is unchangeable immutable law.

While being contentious, covering up, engaging in endless polemical public relations and apologetic warfare is good and beneficial for the church in the "short term ", these victories are short lived wins of a endless ti.t for tat game that leave the church in a worsened condition in the long term albeit good tentative fix in the short term. As this strategy works until for example, expose's come out years later, internal leaks, internal church faxes as accidently sent to the wrong number and end up in the hands of the press or members drop their bundles and speak out, just a few examples. Then we are in a deep hole that not even our wisest apologists can build a ladder sufficiently tall enough to get us out of.

It's impossible to do effective apologetics in this fashion in fact it is an indefensible position to take and it resolves nothing for our apologists because technology can record everything and it's too easy today to count the cards so to speak and do cross checks and things. For example checking if inspired authoritative statements gel with other inspired authoritative statements. Trying to repair the mess all this creates is a bloody nuisance and only induces migraines for defenders. While the current strategy of apologetics was effective before the advent of the internet it fails in the internet age, where anyone can dig around.

True my approach of a no holds barred strict open honest policy would leave the church damaged, a number of members would be lost, wounds would be exposed, a heap of ground would be lost, if my strategy were adopted by every member of the church from tomorrow, however I believe in the long run, this honesty would reflect the light of truth to the fact this is the one true church and I believe that statistically in the long run the church would grow exponentially in membership, wealth and power exceeding what it is under the current approach if this approach was adopted.

This is my little soap box manifesto and philosophy on apologetics sorry to get off topic but you appeared to be confused by my posts. I do not see my radically new philosophic strategy being adopted any time soon for a number of reasons, however I believe %100 honesty is the only solution, as truth has a strange quality that seems to endure while it's opposite seems to be detected even if it takes a long time. I do not think members who prefer endless fighting and conflict to feed their misguided religious zeal, believing they are fulfilling their part as some kind of lds soldiers of Christ on a apologetic jihad crusade to feed their ego's would like my strategy, even though my philosophic strategy does not compromise on the truth of the restored gospel, it is peaceful and lacks macho intellectual muscle flexing which is evidently more appealing. Perhaps my philosophy is wrong, I see no reason why it may not be, however it's my little pop quack belief and I am sticking to it!

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...