Calm Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 But let any Mormon try and float an equivalent statement from our perspective over on the discussion boards at catholic.com. Evisceration will follow as surely as ugly follows Miley Cyrus. Unfortunately there are probably some LDS out there that will be more than happy to provide such examples for you. Thankfully the moderators of this board won't tolerate such as well as most posters here not ever being inclined to (the few that were have either learned to be silent or have been banned). Most of the Catholics and many of the Protestants who have posted on the board are equally as gracious. 1
The Nehor Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Unfortunately there are probably some LDS out there that will be more than happy to provide such examples for you. Thankfully the moderators of this board won't tolerate such as well as most posters here not ever being inclined to (the few that were have either learned to be silent or have been banned). Most of the Catholics and many of the Protestants who have posted on the board are equally as gracious. Oooohhhh....can I test this? Anyone who does not accept LDS baptism in this life will go straight to hell where they shall eat not but burning hot coals and drink naught but burning hot coal. Where fiery demons will poke you in the back and your tongue and eyes pulled out by ravenous birds and your soul will be chopped into confetti and strewn upon a parade of murderers and single mothers.
Storm Rider Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 If the Bishoprics and Stake Presidencies were in tune with the spirit as I was taught they were, shouldn't they know if a person is lying to them? Those in tune will know, but that does not stop them from allowing "you" to lie in your answers and accept your lie for it is. Who is harmed? The one who lies or the one who simply hears the lie and accepts that you are a liar? 1
The Nehor Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Those in tune will know, but that does not stop them from allowing "you" to lie in your answers and accept your lie for it is. Who is harmed? The one who lies or the one who simply hears the lie and accepts that you are a liar? I had a fun experience where I explained that this sometimes happened and the man was outraged: "Are you telling me God can tell them I am a liar?!? That is cruel!""Yes, but only if you are lying.""And that makes it okay?!?""Yeah, pretty much."
JLHPROF Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 (edited) Lol! I'm expecting any day now for you to announce you've left the Church and joined our brothers and sisters down in Centennial Park, UT. Actually, the more I think about it, in a topic like "honest sinners", at least fundamentalists are consistent in their doctrine. They believe the gospel exactly as restored by Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. We spend so much time trying to explain away truths we don't like. We have members trying to mesh science and the scripture in creative ways. We have members arguing that same sex relationships can be eternal. We have members calling for denouncing of early prophets. We have members fighting to have women ordained to ecclesiastical office. We have all had fun debating whether we actually have to live the Word of Wisdom. We have members who hate tithing so much they will twist any doctrine to reduce the amount they pay. We have members who would pretty much allow any part of the gospel to be changed and wouldn't think twice about it. Yeah, fundamentalists may have no authority, but at least they're faithful to the restored gospel doctrines as they understand them. They take the prophets to say what they mean and mean what they say. Maybe we could learn something. I feel the same way about the Catholic Church. They may have no authority but at least they stick to their guns on many of their doctrines. Edited September 26, 2014 by JLHPROF 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 26, 2014 Author Posted September 26, 2014 JLHPROF, I agree. There seems to be a lot of confusion in our church from members who mean well.
The Nehor Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Actually, the more I think about it, in a topic like "honest sinners", at least fundamentalists are consistent in their doctrine. They believe the gospel exactly as restored by Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. We spend so much time trying to explain away truths we don't like. We have members trying to mesh science and the scripture in creative ways. We have members arguing that same sex relationships can be eternal. We have members calling for denouncing of early prophets. We have members fighting to have women ordained to ecclesiastical office. We have all had fun debating whether we actually have to live the Word of Wisdom. We have members who hate tithing so much they will twist any doctrine to reduce the amount they pay. We have members who would pretty much allow any part of the gospel to be changed and wouldn't think twice about it. Yeah, fundamentalists may have no authority, but at least they're faithful to the restored gospel doctrines as they understand them. They take the prophets to say what they mean and mean what they say. Maybe we could learn something. I feel the same way about the Catholic Church. They may have no authority but at least they stick to their guns on many of their doctrines.Actually most fundamentalists are cafeteria mormons who emphasize specifics from the days of the founders and ignore others. 1
JLHPROF Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Actually most fundamentalists are cafeteria mormons who emphasize specifics from the days of the founders and ignore others. That hasn't been my experience in my studies. They pretty much believe literally whatever Joseph and Brigham said, no questions asked. 1
Hamba Tuhan Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 That hasn't been my experience in my studies. They pretty much believe literally whatever Joseph and Brigham said, no questions asked. I think they believe the early prophets of the Restoration in a manner similar to how the Nephites in Helaman 13 thought they believed their past prophets.
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 That hasn't been my experience in my studies. They pretty much believe literally whatever Joseph and Brigham said, no questions asked. While they take some of what they said seriously they tend to ignore other parts. The FLDS for example does not have Brigham or Joseph's dedication to secular learning. They do not send out missionaries which Brigham and Joseph did non-stop. They seem to have no interest in warning the world and bringing people into the fold (mostly fear of sexual competition I expect) despite the D&C and Joseph and Brigham taking that as one of, if not the most important thing they had to do with the gospel. So no, they pick and choose. They emulate Joseph and Brigham only if you fixate on 19th century culture emulated and a few doctrines they love. Comparing them holistically to Joseph Smith's teachings......the LDS church is far closer.
Tacenda Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 While they take some of what they said seriously they tend to ignore other parts. The FLDS for example does not have Brigham or Joseph's dedication to secular learning. They do not send out missionaries which Brigham and Joseph did non-stop. They seem to have no interest in warning the world and bringing people into the fold (mostly fear of sexual competition I expect) despite the D&C and Joseph and Brigham taking that as one of, if not the most important thing they had to do with the gospel.So no, they pick and choose. They emulate Joseph and Brigham only if you fixate on 19th century culture emulated and a few doctrines they love. Comparing them holistically to Joseph Smith's teachings......the LDS church is far closer.It's not as open, but FLDS do try to recruit, but basically to women. I've just heard stories.
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 It's not as open, but FLDS do try to recruit, but basically to women. I've just heard stories.They do but they are only recruiting to meet their own internal relationship ratio needs. Hardly taking the gospel to all the world. They know if they proselyte openly and accept all (and stop culling their own flock of boys) their religion will become impossible to live.
omni Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 They do but they are only recruiting to meet their own internal relationship ratio needs. Hardly taking the gospel to all the world. They know if they proselyte openly and accept all (and stop culling their own flock of boys) their religion will become impossible to live.Why would it be impossible to live?
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Why would it be impossible to live?If exaltation requires plural marriage then you need at least a 2:1 ratio. If you cannot meet that ratio then doctrinally they go to hell. Hence the religion is impossible to live. I sympathize. I may be damned because I cannot find one wife.
omni Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 If exaltation requires plural marriage then you need at least a 2:1 ratio. If you cannot meet that ratio then doctrinally they go to hell. Hence the religion is impossible to live. I sympathize. I may be damned because I cannot find one wife. But isn't that exactly how our church practiced it until it was compelled to stop polygamy?
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 But isn't that exactly how our church practiced it until it was compelled to stop polygamy?No, most men in the Church then did not have more then one wife. Brigham Young made acceptance of the principle vital. I would argue it still is but as to living it being mandatory for everyone on earth to live....no, we never did that.
omni Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 No, most men in the Church then did not have more then one wife. Yes, but that was because leaders such as BY were marrying dozens of women a piece. I see no major differences in how the early Saints practiced polygamy and how modern fundamentalist Mormons practice it. IMO, It's a practice that simply doesn't work no matter which group is living it.
The Nehor Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Yes, but that was because leaders such as BY were marrying dozens of women a piece. I see no major differences in how the early Saints practiced polygamy and how modern fundamentalist Mormons practice it. IMO, It's a practice that simply doesn't work no matter which group is living it.And if Brigham Young had married two and so had everyone else then every man would have had two wives?
omni Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 And if Brigham Young had married two and so had everyone else then every man would have had two wives?No, that's my point, polygamy doesn't work no matter which group is practicing it.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 27, 2014 Author Posted September 27, 2014 It does seem odd that only the leaders got to practice polygamy and have numerous sealed spouses and not the common folk.
Tacenda Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 It soon became more widespread, higher percentages in certain areas. Which is funny because some will say it was only 5% overall, but that was only in certain areas, it was much higher in others. And Brigham Young taught that it should be lived whether you were in higher leadership or not.
Calm Posted September 28, 2014 Posted September 28, 2014 It does seem odd that only the leaders got to practice polygamy and have numerous sealed spouses and not the common folk.There were "common folk" that participated as well, I have some in my ancestry.
Recommended Posts