More from the "I don't understand history" thread (which may be the worst MDD thread ever):
Sky wrote:A Mormon is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – pure and simple. That is a commonly understood and permanent definition. I guess I just find it odd how certain people are so eager to identify themselves as a Mormon while rejecting most or all of the doctrines of the Church. It speaks to the power that Mormon theology holds over people, whether they believe it or not. They want it both ways. It’s like it’s become some sort of ethnicity for them or something.
If it has "become some kind of ethnicity" then it's obvious it's NOT about the "power that Mormon theology holds over people."
Anyway, that's what is most interesting about an otherwise dreary thread: the deep chagrin over people who acknowledge
their own history as Mormons at the same time rejecting their membership in the contemporary church.
I wish MFBukowski would weigh in and tell Sky a few things about "understood and permanent definitions." Like their non-permanence, i.e., their
historical status. For a thread ostensibly about history, no one want to admit the possibility of
change.Also, Lightbearer says, "Do I believe some rabid Anti-Mormon scum or some faithless intellectual that depends on the testimony of traitors or liars for their history or do they believe the official Church history[?]"
I dunno. Ask Juanita Brooks for starters. Or Richard Bushman even.
In other words, read some history.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."