Mississippi Bishop Resigns from the Pulpit

[Teancum]

On 1/17/2024 at 9:20 AM, Amulek said:

I remember breaking up with this girl in high school because I was interested in dating someone else. Strangely, when I left her for that other girl, it was like my ex-girlfriend suddenly stopped interacting with me - almost as though she disappeared overnight. Weird, right?

 

 

So what you are saying is that the ideal of seeking out the lost sheep is just lip service apparently.

[Kenngo1969]

31 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So what you are saying is that the ideal of seeking out the lost sheep is just lip service apparently.

No, it isn't.  We're glad to seek out the lost sheep.  Lost porcupines who have their quills out for most anything related to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and who spare no pains to tell anyone who will listen that they don't want to be found?  Yeahhhh ... not so much.   If that makes us hypocrites, I suppose we'll simply have to plead guilty.

[Diamondhands69]

3 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Two main questions first:

1. "Last year" we were supposed to be studying the New Testament, not the Doctrine and Covenants.  Why were you discussing the Doctrine and Covenants "last year"?
2. If you meant the 2021 lessons (when we were actually studying the Doctrine and Covenants), then Section 132 was scheduled for November 8–14, which would have fallen on the second Sunday of the month.  I remember being disappointed that the Section 132 lesson didn't fall on a first or third Sunday when Sunday School is being held (Elders Quorum and Relief Society are supposed to be held on the second and fourth Sunday).  

So how did you manage to have a Sunday School lesson on Section 132 "last year" or even in 2021? 

You are right it was in ‘21

are you saying there were no dc 132 lessons taught in 2021? Anywhere in the church? What makes you so sure?

[Stargazer]

2 hours ago, InCognitus said:

Two main questions first:

1. "Last year" we were supposed to be studying the New Testament, not the Doctrine and Covenants.  Why were you discussing the Doctrine and Covenants "last year"?

And for @Diamondhands69

First, he may have a faulty time remembrance. It happens to me. I say, "Didn't we do [insert thing] last year?" And then it turns out to be three years ago. Or longer. You might want to cut him some slack on that.

2 hours ago, InCognitus said:

If you meant the 2021 lessons (when we were actually studying the Doctrine and Covenants), then Section 132 was scheduled for November 8–14, which would have fallen on the second Sunday of the month.  I remember being disappointed that the Section 132 lesson didn't fall on a first or third Sunday when Sunday School is being held (Elders Quorum and Relief Society are supposed to be held on the second and fourth Sunday).  

In 2021, in fact, if we had covered that in Sunday School, the following was in the lesson manual:

Doctrine and Covenants 132:1–2, 29–40

Plural marriage is acceptable to God only when He commands it.
If class members have questions about plural marriage, help them see that Joseph Smith and other early Saints had questions too. Encourage them to find the question Joseph asked the Lord in Doctrine and Covenants 132:1 and the answer he received in verses 29–40 (see also Jacob 2:27, 30). To help class members learn about ways they can find answers to their gospel questions, it might help to review together “Answering Gospel Questions” at topics.ChurchofJesusChrist.org. Maybe class members could share how they have sought answers to gospel questions and how they remain faithful even when some of their questions remain unanswered.

So it appears that in 2021, at least, it was not a taboo subject in Sunday School. While it doesn't seem to specifically direct discussion of the subject, and seems to make it optional if class members want to discuss it, it isn't shying away, under wraps. But, as you point out, Sunday School wasn't in session on the day in question.

Of course, it could be claimed that it was deliberately arranged that study of DC 132 occur on a day when we weren't in Sunday School. If one were suspicious.

HOWEVER, in the CFM for Individuals and Families it does explicitly cover the subject, as follows:

Doctrine and Covenants 132:1–2, 29–40

Plural marriage is acceptable to God only when He commands it.
Anyone who has read the Old Testament has probably wondered about Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and others marrying multiple wives. Were these good men committing adultery? Or did God approve of their actions? Look for answers in Doctrine and Covenants 132:1–2, 29–40.

Marriage between one man and one woman is God’s standard of marriage (see the section heading to Official Declaration 1; see also Jacob 2:27, 30). However, there have been periods in history when God has commanded His children to practice plural marriage.

The early years of the restored Church were one of those periods of exception. After receiving this commandment, Joseph Smith and other Latter-day Saints practiced plural marriage. If you want to learn more about plural marriage among the early Latter-day Saints, see “Mercy Thompson and the Revelation on Marriage” (Revelations in Context, 281–93); Saints, 1:290–92, 432–35, 482–92, 502–4; “Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” (Gospel Topics, topics.ChurchofJesusChrist.org); “Why Was It Necessary for Joseph Smith and Others to Practice Polygamy?” (video, ChurchofJesusChrist.org). [emphasis added]

Now. leave it to those devious church authorities to put this material right where everyone could find it. And thus keep it well hidden (since, who reads the manual, anyway?). If members of the church were following the CFM program, as they have been directed to, they would run smack into the topic, quite obviously by the intention of the church manual writers. 

2 hours ago, InCognitus said:

So how did you manage to have a Sunday School lesson on Section 132 "last year" or even in 2021? 

Do you keep copies of old lesson manuals? Perhaps you can locate the relevant pre-CFM manual to see if the topic was officially taboo in that year. Or perhaps the relevant old manual is kept in the meetinghouse library. It would be interesting to see how it was being approached in that year (2017?).

 

[Stargazer]

10 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

You are right it was in ‘21

are you saying there were no dc 132 lessons taught in 2021? Anywhere in the church? What makes you so sure?

See my previous post.

And he was saying that the Sunday School was not meeting in the week that DC 132 was in the program. Most units of the church hold Priesthood/Relief Society on the 2nd and 4th Sunday, and Sunday School on the 1st and 3rd. In 2021, November 14 fell on a 2nd Sunday, and no Sunday School was held that day -- UNLESS there are units in the church that do it other than how it's apparently scheduled church-wide.

[webbles]

7 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

See my previous post.

And he was saying that the Sunday School was not meeting in the week that DC 132 was in the program. Most units of the church hold Priesthood/Relief Society on the 2nd and 4th Sunday, and Sunday School on the 1st and 3rd. In 2021, November 14 fell on a 2nd Sunday, and no Sunday School was held that day -- UNLESS there are units in the church that do it other than how it's apparently scheduled church-wide.

A Sunday School teacher can choose to teach from the lesson that was missed.  From the 2021 manual - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-sunday-school-doctrine-and-covenants-2021/using?lang=eng

Quote

This resource includes teaching outlines for every week of the year. On Sundays when Sunday School is not held, families will continue reading the Doctrine and Covenants at home according to the schedule outlined in Come, Follow Me—For Individuals and Families. You may choose to skip the lessons that fall on a week when Sunday School isn’t held, or you may teach from multiple lessons during a single class.

 

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

are you saying there were no dc 132 lessons taught in 2021? Anywhere in the church? What makes you so sure?

[sarcasm mode on]:  No, I'm just saying you missed another opportunity to criticize the church for purposely scheduling the Section 132 lesson on a second Sunday to ensure that polygamy wouldn't be discussed in a classroom setting. [sarcasm mode off] *

In our ward we just discussed section 132 and polygamy in Elder's quorum that Sunday .

* I have a key on my keyboard to enable sarcasm mode, but it never shows up that way when I'm typing it in a post for some reason.

Edited January 21, 2024 by InCognitus

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

And for @Diamondhands69

…

Now. leave it to those devious church authorities to put this material right where everyone could find it. And thus keep it well hidden (since, who reads the manual, anyway?). If members of the church were following the CFM program, as they have been directed to, they would run smack into the topic, quite obviously by the intention of the church manual writers. 

Do you keep copies of old lesson manuals? Perhaps you can locate the relevant pre-CFM manual to see if the topic was officially taboo in that year. Or perhaps the relevant old manual is kept in the meetinghouse library. It would be interesting to see how it was being approached in that year (2017?).

 

I’m having trouble recalling where I said the church was hiding the polygamy info. 
 

2017?  What’s in 2017? I mentioned I was a gospel doctrine teacher in the early 2000s.. that’s over 20 yrs ago and no I didn’t save the manual. Those were turned in upon completion of the calling. I would have tossed it in the trash when done anyway. 
 

I don’t want my house to look like my parents with new era, friend , ensign copies etc dating all the way back to the ‘60s cluttering all the storage space and garage. I would not be surprised if they had accumulated  thousands of copies of all types of church propaganda. They even had a catalogued (labeled with their own version of the Dewey decimal system ) library of all kinds of church books in the living room occupying several book cases. 

[Diamondhands69]

56 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

[sarcasm mode on]:  No, I'm just saying you missed another opportunity to criticize the church for purposely scheduling the Section 132 lesson on a second Sunday to ensure that polygamy wouldn't be discussed in a classroom setting. [sarcasm mode off] *

I didn’t need to. The teacher took care of that for all of us. 

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

In our ward we just discussed section 132 and polygamy in Elder's quorum that Sunday .

I can’t wait for the day we discuss it for real at church. In all my fifty plus years it has never been discussed to any substantive depth at least whenever I have been there. 
 

[Stormin' Mormon]

 

37 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I can’t wait for the day we discuss it for real at church. In all my fifty plus years it has never been discussed to any substantive depth at least whenever I have been there. 
 

I've lead in-depth discussions in both the seminary and gospel doctrine classes I've taught in the last decade. Avoidance of the topic is a cultural issue, not an institutional one. 

[Emily]

22 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I didn’t need to. The teacher took care of that for all of us. 

So... If I'm understanding things correctly.. In some forgotten year, in some forgotten ward, some forgotten teacher decided to focus a Section 132 lesson on something other than polygamy.

But I'm still trying to figure out what your point is by bringing this up?

Teachers aren't obligated, nor is it even possible, to cover every section of the lesson.

All Sunday School teachers are forced by time constraints to focus on one or two topical sections from the lesson. They are also forced by time constraints to prevent class members from derailing the planned discussion. Otherwise, we would be wasting our time every week listening to the guy in the back row reciting chapters from the Book of Jasher. (A true and sad example of a teacher who did not manage to control a digressive influence.)

So again, what point were you trying to make? Do you perhaps have the misconception that Gospel Doctrine teachers are required to read every sentence of the lesson manual out loud to the class? 

It's really not necessary for teachers to do that. Most active adults in the church understand that class members can read the manual themselves, talk to the teacher or other class members after class, or just wait four years for the yearly topic to come around again if they are interested in a different section of the lesson.

 

[InCognitus]

7 hours ago, Diamondhands69 said:

it is taboo. When I was last a gospel doctrine instructor in early 2000s we had a year where we were going over D&C. There were explicit instructions in the teachers manual not to discuss polygamy. 

Where does the manual from the early 2000s say "not to discuss polygamy"?

The manual saying that plural marriage "should not be the focus of the lesson" is FAR different than saying it should not be discussed at all.

In fact, The Doctrine and Covenants and Church History: Gospel Doctrine Teacher’s Manual (1999), which was used for the decade of 2000 to 2010 (at least), included a lot of information on polygamy and plural marriage (also starting on page 181 of the PDF version) :

Quote

6. Plural marriage

The following information is provided to help you address questions class members may have about the practice of plural marriage. This topic should not be the focus of the lesson.

The Lord’s purpose for commanding His people to practice plural marriage

In the Book of Mormon, the prophet Jacob taught: “For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife. … [But] if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things” (Jacob 2:27, 30). At various times throughout biblical history, the Lord commanded people to practice plural marriage. For example, He gave this command to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon (D&C 132:1).

The revelation to practice plural marriage in this dispensation

In this dispensation, the Lord commanded some of the early Saints to practice plural marriage. The Prophet Joseph Smith and those closest to him, including Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, were challenged by this command, but they obeyed it. Church leaders regulated the practice. Those entering into it had to be authorized to do so, and the marriages had to be performed through the sealing power of the priesthood. See also:

a.  Plural Marriage in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

b. Mercy Thompson and the Revelation on Marriage

c. The Messenger and the Manifesto

The Church’s position on plural marriage today

In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff received a revelation that the leaders of the Church should cease teaching the practice of plural marriage (Official Declaration 1, pages 291–92 in the Doctrine and Covenants; see also the excerpts from addresses by President Woodruff that immediately follow Official Declaration 1).

In 1998, President Gordon B. Hinckley made the following statement about the Church’s position on plural marriage: “This Church has nothing whatever to do with those practicing polygamy. They are not members of this Church. … If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1998, 92; or Ensign, Nov. 1998, 71).

Plural marriage in the eternities

Latter-day Saints today do not practice polygamy. However, because temple marriage covenants are eternal in nature, some Saints may have questions about plural marriage in the eternities. Elder Dallin H. Oaks, who remarried after his first wife died, explained that although we do not know everything about the eternities, we do know that if we are faithful, our temple marriage covenants are eternal in nature: “There are a lot of people that live on this earth that have been married to more than one person. Sometimes those marriages have ended with death; sometimes they’ve ended with divorce. … For people who live in the belief, as I do, that marriage relations can be for eternity, then you must say, ‘What will life be in the next life, when you’re married to more than one wife for eternity?’ I have to say I don’t know. But I know that I’ve made those covenants, and I believe if I am true to the covenants that the blessing that’s anticipated here will be realized in the next life” (in “Elder Oaks Interview Transcript from PBS Documentary,” July 20, 2007, mormonnewsroom.org).

CFR for where there were "explicit instructions in the teachers manual not to discuss polygamy".

Edited January 21, 2024 by InCognitus

[Emily]

1 hour ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I can’t wait for the day we discuss it for real at church. In all my fifty plus years it has never been discussed to any substantive depth at least whenever I have been there

I don't understand why you are waiting for an "substantive depth" discussion on plural marriage in a 30 minute Gospel Doctrine class.

Are you also waiting for a substantive discussion on the practice of animal sacrifice, or a really nitty-gritty lecture on circumcision? How about a definitive and in-depth discussion on clean and unclean animals?

I know some people think they are total experts after listening to a 30 minute podcast on the topic, but I'll assume you aren't one of those guys. So, do you think it's even possible to cover any of the above topics in any great depth in 30 minutes?

Plural marriage was in the past, just like the aforementioned examples above, directions on how to handle leprosy, and whether or not women should wear hats to church.

These topics are touched on briefly in gospel doctrine lessons, as needed, to understand how they fit into the historical setting. And that's it.

If you want to get really modern on "topics dropped when no longer relevant" when was the last time you had a really long lesson on the evils of smoking? 

There are so many topics that are so much more important to modern members here and now. How about the sanctity of marriage in a world that has decided not only to treat it lightly, but redefine it entirely?

If any teacher wasted my 30 minutes in a Gospel Doctrine class waffling on about plural marriage, I would think he was a fruitcake who was allowing his personal hobbies to dictate class content, with little regard for the needs of his class members. A few months ago, I spent two hours explaining to a friend why Celestial Law and homosexual marriage are not compatible. So that teacher better be discussing celestial marriage, not plural marriage, when I'm sitting in class 

If you want to study plural marriage, there are lots of books written about the subject. Go read a few.

I'm sure some of the church history buffs on the forum here can recommend some good ones. Or look up the subject in the Maxwell Institute archives at byu.edu. Then maybe you can add a brief insight on the subject, in class, the next time the Church History manual is up for study -- instead of waiting fifty years for a teacher to spoon-feed you the information that you apparently aren't even willing to read the lesson manual to obtain. 

 

 

Edited January 22, 2024 by Emily

[Diamondhands69]

2 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

 

I've lead in-depth discussions in both the seminary and gospel doctrine classes I've taught in the last decade. Avoidance of the topic is a cultural issue, not an institutional one. 

I agree 100%. Until the institution comes out and discusses it as it should be, it will remain this way. 
 

just like coke and Pepsi was culturally prohibited in the church as a WOW. Violation. No one ever prohibited it, but the church leaders let it roll on for I don’t know… 30 years plus? Even ByU pulled all caffeine from the soda machines. All for a fake rule the leadership couldn’t find time to put to bed

Edited January 22, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[Diamondhands69]

1 hour ago, InCognitus said:

CFR for where there were "explicit instructions in the teachers manual not to discuss polygamy".

“6. Plural marriage

The following information is provided to help you address questions class members may have about the practice of plural marriage. This topic should not be the focus of the lesson.”

That looks like what i was referring to. Not bad memory for being about 25 years ago. 

[Tacenda]

14 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I agree 100%. Until the institution comes out and discusses it as it should be, it will remain this way. 
 

just like come and Pepsi was culturally prohibited in the church as a WOW. Violation. No one ever prohibited it, but the church leaders let it roll on for I don’t know… 30 years plus? Even ByU pulled all caffeine from the soda machines. All for a fake rule the leadership couldn’t find time to put to bed

I agree with @Emily, don't be shocked some of you. I think the only thing the teacher should do possibly is mention for the class to go to the Gospel Topic Essays and read it in depth since it would be a subject that needs much studying and the class time does not support that. Of course I've heard the essays are even more difficult to find these days, not sure how true since I'm lazy and don't want to see about it. I do know that when the essays first came about many that shared about it, were in trouble by the local leaders. 

Edited January 22, 2024 by Tacenda

[Diamondhands69]

47 minutes ago, Emily said:

I don't understand why you are waiting for an "substantive depth" discussion on plural marriage in a 30 minute Gospel Doctrine class.

I’m thinking it would be very entertaining to see the reactions on people’s faces when they learn Joseph as a 37 year old was marrying 14 year old girls, other mens wives while they were on a mission, mother and daughter duos. Sister duos, getting married to two sisters with Emma’s consent who he was already married to etc. 

all the lies involved in plural marriage. Once people see what a crummy guy JS was many will be very disappointed. Likely many have heard a few of these things but to get it officially from the church along with a sales job of this was a good thing ( we can’t criticize prophets) will be something else. People like you I imagine admire his shenanigans. 
 

I just wanna watch with a bowl of popcorn. 

47 minutes ago, Emily said:

Plural marriage was in the past, just like the aforementioned examples above, directions on how to handle leprosy, and whether or not women should wear hats to church.

I hate to break it to you. Polygamy is just not practiced. It is still doctrine and women would be well- served to at least be informed they are merely property to be given to a man. They should know what they “believe” in. 

47 minutes ago, Emily said:

There are so many topics that are so much more important to modern members here and now. How about the sanctity of marriage in a world that has decided not only to treat it lightly, but redefine it entirely?

polygamy is a modern topic. It is still current doctrine, just not practiced. 

47 minutes ago, Emily said:

If any teacher wasted my 30 minutes in a Gospel Doctrine class waffling on about plural marriage, I would think he was a fruitcake who was allowing his personal hobbies to dictate class content, with little regard for the needs of his class members. A few months ago, I spent two hours explaining to a friend why Celestial Law and homosexual marriage are not compatible. So that teacher better be discussing celestial marriage, not plural marriage, when I'm sitting in class 

make sure your hubby is holding to the iron rod else in the afterlife you may get handed off to the gospel doctrine teacher who wasted your time with a polygamy lesson. How ironic that would be. 

 

[Stormin' Mormon]

23 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

I agree 100%. Until the institution comes out and discusses it as it should be, it will remain this way. 
 

just like come and Pepsi was culturally prohibited in the church as a WOW. Violation. No one ever prohibited it, but the church leaders let it roll on for I don’t know… 30 years plus? Even ByU pulled all caffeine from the soda machines. All for a fake rule the leadership couldn’t find time to put to bed

I think you and I differ in our beliefs about how much the institutional church has actually said about this topic. In addition to the four Gospel Topic essays on the issues, Volume 2 of "Saints" contains some very frank and forthright narratives about the plural marriage experience. To say nothing of the numerous other articles and videos in the Church History section of the Gospel Library app that I found with only a few minutes effort.

With the advent of the Gospel Library app, every member of the Church is walking around with these resources in their pockets. The institutional church has made the information freely available to its members. What its members do with that info is largely a cultural question, over which the Church has only indirect influence.

 

[Stormin' Mormon]

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I agree with @Emily, don't be shocked some of you. I think the only thing the teacher should do possibly is mention for the class to go to the Gospel Topic Essays and read it in depth since it would be a subject that needs much studying and the class time does not support that. Of course I've heard the essays are even more difficult to find these days, not sure how true since I'm lazy and don't want to see about it. I do know that when the essays first came about many that shared about it, were in trouble by the local leaders. 

I easily found the Gospel Topics essay in the app with only a few minutes of toodling around. In fact, I found a couple of different vectors for navigating to the essays. And in the process, I found even more resources about the topic. 

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

I easily found the Gospel Topics essay in the app with only a few minutes of toodling around. In fact, I found a couple of different vectors for navigating to the essays. And in the process, I found even more resources about the topic. 

Not too bad, I checked it out.

[Diamondhands69]

8 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

I think you and I differ in our beliefs about how much the institutional church has actually said about this topic. In addition to the four Gospel Topic essays on the issues, Volume 2 of "Saints" contains some very frank and forthright narratives about the plural marriage experience. To say nothing of the numerous other articles and videos in the Church History section of the Gospel Library app that I found with only a few minutes effort.

With the advent of the Gospel Library app, every member of the Church is walking around with these resources in their pockets. The institutional church has made the information freely available to its members. What its members do with that info is largely a cultural question, over which the Church has only indirect influence.

 

Whats that saying about church hiding info from its members in its books? It’s “hidden” because the members don’t read the books. That is cultural everywhere, not just the church. 
 

an organization who wants its members to know something will actually teach it and they will teach what they want members to know. The church can publish all it wants. You can go to any ward and I’d be surprised if you can find even 25% of the members ( adults ) who can tell you what the GTEs are, what they are about and why they were/are controversial. If they have been paying attention all along, they would know why they are controversial.  My wife didn’t even read them till a year ago. She told me she never heard of them when I tried discussing them over the period of a few years . Told me I needed to be careful about what I read lol. It’s on the church app.
 

She has since read them. She also feels the church lied, hid and obfuscated the truth about much of the content of those essays. Both of us are seminary graduates although i spent lots of time at Dunkin donuts. My home life was churchy enough and even I never heard of some of the material. 

 

 

[Diamondhands69]

47 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

I easily found the Gospel Topics essay in the app with only a few minutes of toodling around. In fact, I found a couple of different vectors for navigating to the essays. And in the process, I found even more resources about the topic. 

One of the issues with this essays thing is the roll out. Even the church rep in charge of it admitted they rolled it out in a manner which made it so most likely didn’t know about it. 
 

unless they are talked about, announced or whatever, people will not look for them much less read them. Since the roll out in 2014, I have yet to hear one discussion about them or even a mention in the four or five wards I have been in since then. 
 

if the church wants us to read them, they would tell us so over the pulpit, in conference and in their emails we get sent for other things. 
 

Elder snow even made statements to the effect the church had members who are troubled with these issues so they published these essays for their reference.. but then said yea we aren’t advertising their existence and don’t expect a big campaign… or something along those lines. So yea I’m of the opinion the church isn’t too interested in these topics being discussed otherwise they would have advertised far and wide. -sounds super transparent to me

Edited January 22, 2024 by Diamondhands69

[Duncan]

53 minutes ago, Diamondhands69 said:

if the church wants us to read them, they would tell us so over the pulpit, in conference and in their emails we get sent for other things. 
 

Which has been TWICE in General Conference, one by Elder Golden and Elder Cook. in 2021 Conference. I guess being from a "power Mormon family" you are too busy basking in the glow of your own light not to notice that. Besides of which it was done by then Pres. Ballard in 2016, were you too busy eating at Dunkin Donuts not to notice? I thought you weren't active so who really cares what you think anyways

Edited January 22, 2024 by Duncan

[Diamondhands69]

38 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Which has been TWICE in General Conference, one by Elder Golden and Elder Cook. in 2021 Conference. I guess being from a "power Mormon family" you are too busy basking in the glow of your own light not to notice that. Besides of which it was done by then Pres. Ballard in 2016, were you too busy eating at Dunkin Donuts not to notice? I thought you weren't active so who really cares what you think anyways

Cfr both instances members were told to read the GTEs