DiscussMormonism.com

From the new Joseph Smith lesson manual preface:

"The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the church presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of church members entered into plural marriages.

In a televised interview with Larry King, Hinckley said "it was on a RESTRICTED SCALE, between 2% and 5%.. a very limited practice among the early members.."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cLBy4q9DpTQ

Plus he lies about not know how large the FLDS polygamy is in Utah.. DUH?

Then he says the LDS have nothing in common with the FLDS... Double DUH and a side of WTF?


Let me say it for you defenders, "That was the personal opinion of Hinckley"

dooosh wrote:From the new Joseph Smith lesson manual preface:

"The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the church presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of church members entered into plural marriages.

In a televised interview with Larry King, Hinckley said "it was on a RESTRICTED SCALE, between 2% and 5%.. a very limited practice among the early members.."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cLBy4q9DpTQ

Plus he lies about not know how large the FLDS polygamy is in Utah.. DUH?

Then he says the LDS have nothing in common with the FLDS... Double DUH and a side of WTF?


Let me say it for you defenders, "That was the personal opinion of Hinckley"

Defender response #1: "He wasn't speaking as a prophet."

Defender response #2: "He got confused and possibly misspoke."

Defender response #3: "We don't cast our pearls before swine."

I think 2 to 5% is a significant amount of a population.

My guess is that the new spin is intended to make the practice of polygamy more egalitarian, by implying that a larger number of people engaged in it.

moksha wrote:My guess is that the new spin is intended to make the practice of polygamy more egalitarian, by implying that a larger number of people engaged in it.

Good point. And what better place to reveal these things than a cult meeting?

Just like my first time in the pre-1990 temple ceremony when my mind was spinning with thoughts that I was in a Satanic cult ceremony, I look at my brothers, parents, bishop and community leaders and think that it can't be THAT bad if they have been doing it for years.

Imagine the conversation in EQ/Relief Society or GD class where someone freaks and blerts out "WHAT? Smith was a polygamist???"

Soon they are surrounded by people that they respect and look up to and these people say calming and soothing things.

Drink the koolaid, everyone is doing it.

dooosh wrote:Just like my first time in the pre-1990 temple ceremony when my mind was spinning with thoughts that I was in a Satanic cult ceremony, I look at my brothers, parents, bishop and community leaders and think that it can't be THAT bad if they have been doing it for years.

Funny that. My temple experience was very different. Is yours sealed and approved by God? (or whomever, whatever, you believe in?)

Ray A wrote:

dooosh wrote:Just like my first time in the pre-1990 temple ceremony when my mind was spinning with thoughts that I was in a Satanic cult ceremony, I look at my brothers, parents, bishop and community leaders and think that it can't be THAT bad if they have been doing it for years.

Funny that. My temple experience was very different. Is yours sealed and approved by God? (or whomever, whatever, you believe in?)

That ceremony is nothing more than a manmade ceremony. So asking if it was sealed and approved by some mysterious being is nor relevant.

Further, if it was so grand and wonderful for you, why have you not been re baptized into this religion? You WERE excommunicated right?

Ray A wrote:

dooosh wrote:Just like my first time in the pre-1990 temple ceremony when my mind was spinning with thoughts that I was in a Satanic cult ceremony, I look at my brothers, parents, bishop and community leaders and think that it can't be THAT bad if they have been doing it for years.

Funny that. My temple experience was very different. Is yours sealed and approved by God? (or whomever, whatever, you believe in?)

Is what? His temple experience sealed and approved by God?

My experience was just like dooosh's. I felt uncomfortable, discomfited and downright scared the first time I went through. Does this reaction mean the temple ceremony did not come from God?

Well, I think so.

dooosh wrote:Huh, so then why have you not been re baptized into this religion? You WERE excommunicated right?

Re-baptism isn't the question here. Your vicious and unprincipaled attacks on Mormonism are. You, my friend, are the greatest of hypocrites. If you are so free and happy, so "liberated", why the hell do you continue to attack Mormonism? Have you ever heard of "live, and let live"? Because you in your twisted anger have concluded that Mormonism is "false", you need not foist your views on others in the name of "objective truth". Look at your pathetic posts - you ONLY attack Mormons, or those sympathetic to Mormons - in any way.

Why this obsession? Trying to justify your VAIN self? Want all LDS chapels closed down, to join PP in a night of drunkenness, celebrating the "fraud" of Mormonism?

Trinity wrote:My experience was just like dooosh's. I felt uncomfortable, discomfited and downright scared the first time I went through. Does this reaction mean the temple ceremony did not come from God?

Well, I think so.

That's your opinion. Will you consider mine? Or is yours and doooooooosh's "objective fact"?