why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 It's especially odd for any member to be disturbed by Joseph Smith's polygamy if they know about and accept Brigham Young's.Especially since it is basically in section 132 of the D&C. There is no reason to be disturbed at all. Nothing is actually hidden in that section. If the church was actually hiding it, they would have done away with that section years ago.
Biz Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Then go back to the source of that testimony and follow where it leads you. At the very least you should be able to shake the bitterness against the LDS Church from your soul.Thanks ERayR, I like focusing on positive things and some of my spiritual experiences are indeed positive. Happily I'm no longer brought down in extreme/severe/ or even minor bitterness. Best put, I'm left with a significant indifference to what the Church has to offer.
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 I simply answered his questions truthfully....he wouldn't be in the midst of a faith crisis if his church leaders had simply done the same thing. I shared our conversation here because I wanted posters here to see what church correlation has done by making BY a monogamist, sanitizing its history and denying knowledge of past justifications for whole doctrines. Well this is what you get...this is the direct consequence of church policy...they have no one to blame but themselves?Now johnnie, this is not exactly fair. I can understand that you are a little down on the church and blame the church for everything. But as someone who knows where to find the information from church sources, you should do this or at least give a good explanation. I suppose that the church correlation committee should have a 1000 page book for any or every question that a member has. However, I am sure that even then the correlation committee would have forgotten something to put in the book. It is impossible to have all members know everything about the church and its history. I no of no protestant, catholic, muslim or jew who knows everything about their religions.I think that you enjoyed this conversation too much to give anything helpful to the person who was in contact with you. And you couldn't wait to post it here.
ERayR Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Thanks ERayR, I like focusing on positive things and some of my spiritual experiences are indeed positive. Happily I'm no longer brought down in extreme/severe/ or even minor bitterness. Best put, I'm left with a significant indifference to what the Church has to offer.If you say so. I would think if you were really that indifferent you wouldn't be here at this time of night. At least I surely wouldn't. All the best. 1
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 I've come across some on this board that don't believe D&C 132 has anything to do with polygamy when it's right in the heading!They might be from the Community of Christ.
exmormonatheistofutah Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Poligamy isnt exactly taboo in africa, is it? 1
ERayR Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 I've come across some on this board that don't believe D&C 132 has anything to do with polygamy when it's right in the heading!I don't remember that. What I do remember is disagreement to assertions that D&C 132 was only about polygamy. 1
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 If you're being snarky....no I did not feel bad (evil).But did you help him in his faith crisis or just add to it? And that is not a snarky question but a sincere one. For example, you could have given him links such as this:http://www.ldsgenesisgroup.org/http://www.blacklds.org/As we can see there are sites out there to help. But did you do this? You do know that most informative protestant or catholic sites are sponsored not by a church but by concerned or just members of that church. The lds church is no exception.
Robert F. Smith Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 .............................. perhaps some of your rath should be turned towards the lack of honest forthright information............................... Yokels is as yokels does.
Robert F. Smith Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Poligamy isnt exactly taboo in africa, is it?Excellent point.
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 (edited) That's the problem, people feel they put too much faith in an institution run by men and not in God, atleast I did. I feel cheated out of a belief system I'd have given my life for, even made promises to give everything for the institution. The institution may not have lied outright but the sin of omission could be close to it.As I told Johnnie, most religions have a website that sticks to the basics. But other websites are founded by members of that church. And these websites usually deal with issues, debates, knowledge and understanding. I suppose that the lds church is in a different place because mormons go to church for a 3 hour block where they learn gospel principles to help them in their daily lives and spiritual lives. But protestant churches do this also. Not sure if they get any history taught or 17th century facts about their faith and what was happening in Europe etc. Edited June 21, 2013 by why me
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 (edited) From "Joseph Smith's Reputation," Dean Jessee, Ensign, September, 1979.http://www.lds.org/e...tation?lang=engThis was my point on a different thread. We members were very informed in the 70's. I have no idea why the church correlation committee changed direction and began to leave information out except perhaps they felt it was unnecessary to give such tidbits. Big mistake since the internet came along with exmormon claims of hidden information and deceit. But back then, we knew pretty much which is perhaps why my generation seems immune to 'hidden information syndrome'. Edited June 21, 2013 by why me 1
Biz Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 If you say so. I would think if you were really that indifferent you wouldn't be here at this time of night. At least I surely wouldn't. All the best.Yea, I don't frequent here too often. There are some good people here, some extremely unproductive ones too. Associating in some of these threads is worth my time now and again. Ultimately, I lingered over here to see what Don Bradley was referring to on Facebook regarding the FutureMissionary website.I commented here just cause the whole blame the victim stuff gets on my nerves, I think it's a long shot to blame people for not studying enough or not being diligent enough etc. If you attended seminary in the 90's-20's I think you were given an extremely inadequate view of the Church. I have found that it's people who had their formative years being developed around that time that are really set up for failure when they discover some difficult issues.Because this thread attacked this individual in Africa as likely being being fake, I thought I would cut to the chase and say SO WHAT, my personal journey is near the same and if you discredit his I'm here to stand by mine. I'm not necessarily indifferent to some Church topics, I'm just indifferent to The Church itself. I honor and admire folks like yourself who are on the frontlines doing the church's work when they fail to even show up to the real discussion to discuss the real issues.
Biz Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 This was my point on a different thread. We members were very informed in the 70's. I have no idea why they changed direction and began to leave information out except perhaps they felt it was unnecessary to give such tidbits. Big mistake since the internet came along with exmormon claims of hidden information and deceit.Why me, Exactly! I'm in my 30's the paradigm I was offered was 110% inadequate to take in and process this info.
ERayR Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Yea, I don't frequent here too often. There are some good people here, some extremely unproductive ones too. Associating in some of these threads is worth my time now and again. Ultimately, I lingered over here to see what Don Bradley was referring to on Facebook regarding the FutureMissionary website.I commented here just cause the whole blame the victim stuff gets on my nerves, I think it's a long shot to blame people for not studying enough or not being diligent enough etc. If you attended seminary in the 90's-20's I think you were given an extremely inadequate view of the Church. I have found that it's people who had their formative years being developed around that time that are really set up for failure when they discover some difficult issues.Because this thread attacked this individual in Africa as likely being being fake, I thought I would cut to the chase and say SO WHAT, my personal journey is near the same and if you discredit his I'm here to stand by mine.I'm not necessarily indifferent to some Church topics, I'm just indifferent to The Church itself. I honor and admire folks like yourself who are on the frontlines doing the church's work when they fail to even show up to the real discussion to discuss the real issues.MY amazement comes at the seeming inability to see the irrelevance of these issues when compared to a spiritual witness of the Book of Mormon and the restoration.
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Why me,Exactly! I'm in my 30's the paradigm I was offered was 110% inadequate to take in and process this info.I can understand that. I can feel sorry for your generation. But on the other hand if one really thinks about it, what was the point of getting that tidbit from one of his plural wives? Was it really that important for my own personal well being? Perhaps not. But at that time since we knew about his plural marriages and where they were living, I suppose that it didn't hurt either to know that his plural wives found him above board. Strange, but on every polygamy thread that is critical of his polygamy I always state that not one of his plural wives ever said a negative word about him even years later after he was murdered. Maybe I have unknowing remembered that article in the ensign and expanded it to all of his wives, which is true also.
why me Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 I commented here just cause the whole blame the victim stuff gets on my nerves, I think it's a long shot to blame people for not studying enough or not being diligent enough etc. If you attended seminary in the 90's-20's I think you were given an extremely inadequate view of the Church. I have found that it's people who had their formative years being developed around that time that are really set up for failure when they discover some difficult issues.But on the other hand, I see no reason to leave the church over it. And I guess that is what members are sensitive about on this board. Once someone understands that much was in the past ensign issues back in the good ol days and discussed in class, one can figure out that it had nothing to do with hidden information and rather one of a change of policy direction. Why leave a church over that? Or lose faith over that?
Storm Rider Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 I've yet to meet one African Mormon who gives a hud about polygamy. Especially considering it's still practiced in parts of Africa.This is also my feeling. Having multiple wives in Africa is as normal as eating bread. I don't like the strong sensation of someone manipulating me in order to just make a point.
DonBradley Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 If you're being snarky....no I did not feel bad (evil). If you're asking honestly...I do feel sincere pain for what this young man is going through having gone through a similar faith crisis years ago. Despite what some here may think...losing ones faith and belief is perhaps the most painful experience one can have other than perhaps the death of a close friend or family member. The only positive is that once one works through the loss...life becomes amazingWell, Johnnie, it sounds like you're trying to help a good member in Africa find his way to this "amazing" life by helping him lose his faith.And it seems like the very same "helpful" approach as "FutureMissionary.com" is taking.Any thoughts on that site?Don 1
DonBradley Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 (edited) I merely wanted to share a real life faith crisis with this crowd in real time to show what it like to discover that the church isn't what you believed it to be...remarkiablly this boy is still clinging to his belief...but only by a thread...and the church he once believed in...he come to discover never really existedYes, Johnnie Cake totally sounds like a believer to me: "the church he once believed in...he come to discover never really existed." Edited June 21, 2013 by DonBradley 1
Calm Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Yes, Johnnie Cake totally sounds like a believer to me: "the church he once believed in...he come to discover never really existed."You are getting cynical, Don.
DonBradley Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Given that you mention on the Future Missionary thread that you left the church, why would you be having such discussions with prospective missionaries in Africa?Is this by chance part of your work with FutureMissionary.com?Don 1
DonBradley Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Who me, cynical?!I can't help noticing the similarities in Johnnie Cake's denials of being an anti-Mormon and those of the FutureMissionary site guys. And the way Johnnie Cake's posts on the FutureMissionary thread distance from it while reinforcing its contents and asserting its value suggest that this user may be one of the FM creators posing as merely a reader.Besides, how am I supposed to believe this guy's name is really Johnnie Cake? Who has the last name Cake? ;-)If anything has made me cynical, it's seeing the latest round of tactics on the group of websites comprising FutureMissionary, MormonThink, and MormonInfographics. Don 2
Calm Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 (edited) Tsk, tsk...they only want to help.http://www.whitepages.com/name/Cake Edited June 21, 2013 by calmoriah 1
Alan Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Johnny Cake,I'm joining this thread late and haven't had time (yet) to read all of the contributions. However, you said in the OP that Joseph smith had a number of wives. Having studied this issue for many years I believe this is wrong. It is very to me clear when we look at the evidence, and particuarly the provenance of that evidence, that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy. He was right when he stated he had only one wife.So I believe you have misled this African brother.
Recommended Posts