Kishkumen wrote:This LDS bishop resigned over issues concerning Mormon history and the Book of Mormon. Read his resignation letter, which he posted to his blog.
I think the larger problem/issue was not feeling comfortable going barefoot to church.
From his blog:
As a 24/7 barefooter I also wanted to do what I consider the healthiest way to walk, and be able to attend Church barefoot on Sundays.
But was told I could not. The reason given was because as a priesthood leader I was expected to look like the ‘Brethren’, the General Authorities of the Church, who wear shoes.
Sounds like he was offended.
Regards, MG
I agree with the bishop. Barefoot is best and the healthiest way to walk or run. God made us BF for a reason. Stop hating on the feet, feline.
Exodus 3:4 And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. Exodus 3:5 And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.
It is clear we are to be bare of foot when we approach the Lord.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
xolotl wrote:I am convinced more and more that Why Me must be a troll. It pains me too much to even entertain the possibility that he could be serious and honest in his defense of the church and his approach to Mormonism, especially light cotton.
He is a troll. This is independent of the light cotton thing.
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco - To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei
xolotl wrote:"A large part of the persecution experienced by the Latter-day Saints centered around the practice of plural marriage, which was instituted under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The law of plural marriage was revealed to the Prophet as early as 1831, but he mentioned it only to a few trusted friends. Under strict commandment from God to obey the law, the Prophet began in 1841 to instruct leading priesthood brethren of the Church concerning plural marriage and their responsibility to live the law. The Prophet Joseph Smith dictated the revelation to William Clayton in 1843, when it was first written. Nine years passed, however, before the revelation was read in general conference and published."
This is silliness. Look, it is one thing to say that the guy learned the "law" of plural marriage in 1831, and then taught it to others later, and something entirely different to say that Joseph Smith secretly married and had sexual relations with women other than Emma, without Emma's knowledge or consent, by the mid 1830s. You show me that in a manual, and I'll show you an honest approach to Joseph Smith's practice of plural marriage in Church Education.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Apr 24, 2011 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Notice the copyright dates: 1989, 1993, 2000, 2003.
Or did you not expect your bluff to be called?
ETA: Why Me, if the Church has in fact changed its manual after yours was printed and removed information, as you are apparently claiming, that does not support your argument. It contradicts it.
Ahhhh....I just turned to page 424 from your link and found my information. Please check the first paragraph under the heading The Practice of Plural Marriage. My information is there in that paragraph. But your information I could not find. That paragraph states that Joseph Smith was instructed in plural marriage in 1831 and the rest follows. However, if you are also correct and there is more information, well, how could the former bishop miss it? He is basically a poor guy who got roped into the exmo sites and was led astray.
By the way, my book is not a student manual but a text book. It was published in 1992.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
xolotl wrote:I am convinced more and more that Why Me must be a troll. It pains me too much to even entertain the possibility that he could be serious and honest in his defense of the church and his approach to Mormonism, especially light cotton. I cannot number the times he has blatantly lied and made obvious misrepresentations and false statements, the number is too high. The entire light cotton affair has really mirrored his true intent. He got such a kick out of everyone's reactions that he seemed to find it necessary to mention a Mormon lay at every possible opportunity, even if it had nothing to do with the discussion.
Edited : Why me's qoute from the manual is correct, from the PDF version
"A large part of the persecution experienced by the Latter-day Saints centered around the practice of plural marriage, which was instituted under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The law of plural marriage was revealed to the Prophet as early as 1831, but he mentioned it only to a few trusted friends. Under strict commandment from God to obey the law, the Prophet began in 1841 to instruct leading priesthood brethren of the Church concerning plural marriage and their responsibility to live the law. The Prophet Joseph Smith dictated the revelation to William Clayton in 1843, when it was first written. Nine years passed, however, before the revelation was read in general conference and published."
If I provided correct information from the book how can I be a troll? And someone on this page also gave more information from the book about polygamy that young people learn. But the former bishop missed it somehow and now he had a blog post on how the lds church keeps it hidden when the young people in his ward study it. Isn't it strange how this bishop believed the hype on the exmo sites?
Now for the light cotton. It was a good subject for the thread that it was posted on. My young adult friends in new york city had no problem with a Mormon lay with someone who we were going steady with. No guilt. No confession to the bishop. And I believe that Rambo confirmed it when he also posted a similiar experience without guilt.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
Kishkumen wrote: This is silliness. Look, it is one thing to say that the guy learned the "law" of plural marriage in 1831, and then taught it to others later, and something entirely different from saying that Joseph Smith secretly married and had sexual relations with women other than Emma, without Emma's knowledge or consent, by the mid 1830s. You show me that in a manual, and I'll show you an honest approach to Joseph Smith's practice of plural marriage in Church Education.
Kish, you would never be happy regardless what the church published or didn't publish. There would always be something wrong. Maybe the church should publish a 2,000 page book written by the top 100 critics of the lds church about church history. Would that do? When the lds church brings up polygamy in its seminary classes, do you think that the kids are just silent chewing bubble gum? Someone is more than free to ask: Mr. Crabtree, how many women did Joseph Smith marry?
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote:Kish, you would never be happy regardless what the church published or didn't publish.
My happiness has nothing to do with it, Sherlock. What we are talking about is the effectiveness of the CES approach, and how that bears on the manifest ignorance most members appear to have regarding the actual extent of Joseph Smith's relations with women other than his first wife Emma. You are defending the effectiveness of their approach, when it is quite obvious that it has taken the internet for many people to put these things together.
Now, your patently elitist comments to the effect that everyone should have reached the same conclusions from the LDS correlated materials alone as a few LDS nerdpologists are a bit like Marie Antoinette complaining, "hey, that offer of cake was sincere!" Who cares? The CES approach has failed, and people who are actually interested in doing something about it won't play CYA by spending their good time hunting up every obscure reference to the "law of plural marriage" while the exodus out the chapel door continues. But what do you care? I mean, you don't even go to church anyways.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
If our knowledgeable one with the manual would check and see if it explains how Joe the coxman could marry Fanny Alger a couple years before the sealing authorityi was 'restored', it would help us all. Maybe the good Bishop would even return to his membership and position?
"This is how INGORNAT these fools are!" - darricktevenson
Bow your head and mutter, what in hell am I doing here?
infaymos wrote: "Peterson is the defacto king ping of the Mormon Apologetic world."
Kishkumen wrote:My happiness has nothing to do with it, Sherlock. What we are talking about is the effectiveness of the CES approach, and how that bears on the manifest ignorance most members appear to have regarding the actual extent of Joseph Smith's relations with women other than his first wife Emma. You are defending the effectiveness of their approach, when it is quite obvious that it has taken the internet for many people to put these things together.
Now, your patently elitist comments to the effect that everyone should have reached the same conclusions from the LDS correlated materials alone as a few LDS nerdpologists are a bit like Marie Antoinette complaining, "hey, that offer of cake was sincere!" Who cares? The CES approach has failed, and people who are actually interested in doing something about it won't play CYA by spending their good time hunting up every obscure reference to the "law of plural marriage" while the exodus out the chapel door continues. But what do you care? I mean, you don't even go to church anyways.
No kidding. So the church mentions that Joseph Smith taught polygamy. Who didn't know that? You're quite right that the citation completely contradicts Mr. Light Cotton's point: what he quoted is vague and never mentions any details. How is a person supposed to extrapolate from that paragraph that Joseph married teenagers and married women without his wife's consent?
I actually found your quote, but I figured Why Me was referring to something else since this quote does NOT admit that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy:
A large part of the persecution experienced by the Latter-day Saints centered around the practice of plural marriage, which was instituted under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith. The law of plural marriage was revealed to the Prophet as early as 1831, but he mentioned it only to a few trusted friends. Under strict commandment from God to obey the law, the Prophet began in 1841 to instruct leading priesthood brethren of the Church concerning plural marriage and their responsibility to live the law. The Prophet Joseph Smith dictated the revelation to William Clayton in 1843, when it was first written. Nine years passed, however, before the revelation was read in general conference and published.
by the way: how did they figure it was revealed "as early as 1831?" Did one church historian find Joseph Smith's first documented sexual indiscretion, turn do the other and then say, "Look brother, it turns out God had given the law of polygamy earlier than we expected!"