interesting gobbledygook about women from Brigham Young

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

interesting gobbledygook about women from Brigham Young

Post by _Sethbag »

In this article on FAIRwiki about the "lecture at the veil" where Brigham Young was teaching the Adam/God doctrine, I found something interesting.

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Adam- ... he_Veil%22

Check this out:
It is said by Moses the historian that the Lord caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and took from his side a rib and formed the woman that Adam called Eve—This should be interpreted that the Man Adam like all other men had the seed within him to propagate his species, but not the Woman; she conceives the seed but she does not produce it; consequently she was taken from the side or bowels of her father.

Apparently the Lord didn't see fit to reveal the true nature of conception via sperm and egg to Brigham Young, and he was left to flail about as a mere fallible man, and teach ignorant doctrines of the woman merely being the recepticle (it's our most modestly priced recepticle...) for the seed of life which the man injects into her.

Pardon me for being unimpressed by Brigham's little spiritual insight taught by Brigham Young in the St. George temple as spiritual truth, and how God didn't see fit to set him straight on it. Further evidence, if such is even still necessary, of just how uninspired this whole church is.
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: interesting gobbledygook about women from Brigham Young

Post by _moksha »

Sethbag wrote:In this article on FAIRwiki about the "lecture at the veil" where Brigham Young was teaching the Adam/God doctrine, I found something interesting.

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Adam- ... he_Veil%22

Check this out:
It is said by Moses the historian that the Lord caused a deep sleep to come upon Adam and took from his side a rib and formed the woman that Adam called Eve—This should be interpreted that the Man Adam like all other men had the seed within him to propagate his species, but not the Woman; she conceives the seed but she does not produce it; consequently she was taken from the side or bowels of her father.

Apparently the Lord didn't see fit to reveal the true nature of conception via sperm and egg to Brigham Young, and he was left to flail about as a mere fallible man, and teach ignorant doctrines of the woman merely being the recepticle (it's our most modestly priced recepticle...) for the seed of life which the man injects into her.

Pardon me for being unimpressed by Brigham's little spiritual insight taught by Brigham Young in the St. George temple as spiritual truth, and how God didn't see fit to set him straight on it. Further evidence, if such is even still necessary, of just how uninspired this whole church is.

I can't answer about the God part, but I do know that many had little knowledge of the science of reproduction back then.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

This may be, but that just reinforces the idea that the Prophet of God was teaching spiritual principles as a normal guy, uninspired over what his fellows knew or believed. I mean seriously, in the end, isn't being Prophet of God supposed to mean one actually knows something more than the common ignoramuses they're teaching these spiritual teachings of God?
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Ummm Sethbag...

I mean seriously, in the end, isn't being Prophet of God supposed to mean one actually knows something more than the common ignoramuses they're teaching these spiritual teachings of God?


Nope.

You are being ridiculous!

Why do you think a prophet of God means one actually knows something more than anyone else? Or that God speaks to him? Prophets are just regular guys... some good, some not so good. They share their opinions just like anyone else.

So what if Brigham got it wrong... doesn't mean he isn't a prophet. A prophet is only a prophet when he is speaking as such and that very well may be never.

Because he was teaching and giving a sermon in the temple doesn't mean anything... give it a rest will you!

(wink)

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_Mephitus
_Emeritus
Posts: 820
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:44 pm

Post by _Mephitus »

And here i thought that the prophets will New Testament be allowed to lead the church astray until the 2nd comming. As such, teaching the secondary citizenship and subserviance to man would very much seem to me to be leading members to feel they should have dominion over their women. slavery if youl permit me the word.
One nice thing is, ze game of love is never called on account of darkness - Pepe Le Pew
_Pokatator
_Emeritus
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm

Post by _Pokatator »

Sounds like BY really needed BKPs talk on "little factories".
Post Reply