See link below to full letter. My question is this: how can an LDS GA join a letter with this statement:
Those who tried to live by the Christian understanding have come to amazingly similar conclusions about what God wants in marriage. We have had centuries to try out many different ideas and test them against the text of the Bible and experience. Only traditional marriage has stood. The Orthodox of Russia came to the same conclusion as the Roman Catholics of Italy. The Pentecostals of Kenya came to the same conclusion as the Reformed Christians of Scotland. Over time, different accommodations have been made to extreme or difficult situations, but the ideal has been clear: God's will is for marriage to be a covenant between a man and a woman. Nothing else will work.
Given the LDS Church's long history with polygamy (both in past and current practice and theology), Elder Porter's signing on seems incredibly hypocritical, in my opinion.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
One thing the Bible never suggests is that the world must work the way we desire it to.
WTF does that mean? Sit on your hands in the face of injustice because the Bible doesn't "suggest" it ought to be any better than it already is? Thank *god* generations of good christians haven't followed that line of BS reasoning.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Given the LDS Church's long history with polygamy (both in past and current practice and theology), Elder Porter's signing on seems incredibly hypocritical, in my opinion.
I don't see any problem with it. Plural marriages are simply iterations a "traditional" marriage.
Given the LDS Church's long history with polygamy (both in past and current practice and theology), Elder Porter's signing on seems incredibly hypocritical, in my opinion.
I don't see any problem with it. Plural marriages are simply iterations a "traditional" marriage.
I doubt any non-Mormon traditional Christian would agree. If you recall your history, those against Mormon polygamy believed it particularly abhorrent (much like mainstream Mormons feel today about the Fundamentalists).
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Those who tried to live by the Christian understanding have come to amazingly similar conclusions about what God wants in women. We have had centuries to try out many different ideas and test them against the text of the Bible and experience. Only the traditional role of women has stood. The Orthodox of Russia came to the same conclusion as the Roman Catholics of Italy. The Pentecostals of Kenya came to the same conclusion as the Reformed Christians of Scotland. Over time, different accommodations have been made to extreme or difficult situations, but the ideal has been clear: God's will is for women to be subservient and servile to men, to not speak up in church, and to never, ever vote. Nothing else will work.
Ooh, nothing else will work? That's so scary! Please, tell us more, drooling moralists. You half-wits are clearly the guys we need to run our society.