Bishop's Resignation Letter

[_just me]

Can I just interject that I *love* the use of multiple exclamation points. I'd say three is about the perfect number, but some situations just call for more. ;)

[_why me]

Why me, I would rather have two people believe something that is authentic and true than 1,000,000 people believing something that is false. Jesus had very few following him at the time he was living, not that many anyway and those that did, if the records are correct, left him at his time of most urgent need. Not enough followed him to result in any significant mention in any contemporary documents outside of the small community that he was a part of. It wasn't till Constantine that christianity really started to grow and become powerful.

Absolutely I agree that nothing can be 'proven' either way. But let people have the information there is, as muddy as it is, and let them decide for themselves. This is treating them as spiritual adults rather than children.

Mary

Mary, Mary, Mary, I have known you for quite a long time. We go back years in fact and I do appreciate the kindness that you showed me on a particular exmo board years ago. But I am afraid that I will have to ask you a question about what you posted.

What in your opinion should the church be giving its members in terms of information? You see, Mary, no matter what the church gives to its members, it will not make any antimormon critic on this board happy. Just the opposite, in fact. But really, Mary what should the lds church tell its members from its past history?
And when should it be told? In book form? In the manuals? And how often? Every year? Every month? Twice a year?

Now mary I know of church that gives an indepth history to its members. Do lutherans have an indepth knowledge of lutheran history that is not faith promoting? Do catholics get an indepth history of their church that is not faith promoting? Do baptists? Most people are ignorant of their church's sordid pasts. And the Mormons? Well, they should be required to study a thousand page book about all the details of their history and take an exam once a year so they don't forget.

[_why me]

The problem is not to prove it false. The problem is to prove it true. The null hypothesis is that it is false.

Isn't that the problem of all faiths? Which faith has been proven true? Has god be proven true? With faith because it lacks evidence there is always a null hypothesis.

[_why me]

Why Me's ignorance is ASTOUNDING.

The church most DEFINITELY hides it. All you have to do is go to LDS.org, type in "Joseph Smith Polygamy" and get the results. The results are NOTHING. NADA. ZIP. It may be quietly put into a seminary manual that is NOT FULLY READ, it may be quietly entered into an ENSIGN article that is NOT FULLY READ, it may be put into a book such as Rough Stone Rolling that is NOT READ BY THE MASSES -- and therefore the church may say "See, we are forthcoming in our questionable church history!" That is not being transparent -- that is covering your bases.

Or as the former bishop discovered, it may be in the lds's familysearch.org and discovered by the members.

These days, what exactly would be read fully by the masses? Most people these days get a skimful of knowledge from the internet all within a 15 minute timeslot. Would a thousand page lds history book (published in every langauage under the sun) be bought by all the members? Or read by all the members?

Really schlepp, we need to get a grip here. What information would you like the lds church to include? And what about the catholic church and other churches? What history should they be teaching? Do Americans know their country's history? I mean the real history? Do the Japanese? Do the French? Hardly.

[_why me]

I lived in London and attended church with people who attended Institute. These were the most devoted, most intelligent members of the church I had ever had the great luck to associate with. They knew their Bible, they knew their Book of Mormon. We discussed EVERYTHING -- in class and outside of class. I worked for the Institute director. NOT ONCE DID I HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT JOSEPH SMITH AND POLYGAMY. My guess is, neither did this bishop. When you are surrounded by converts like those in London at that time, the church means EVERYTHING to you. It didn't just fall into your lap. You searched for it. It permeates everything in your life. So grow up, WHY ME, get out of your little dark world wherever it may be, and understand that this bishop didn't come to this decision lightly -- he anguished over it. And you obviously haven't read the New Testament, you obviously know NOTHING about Christ-like behavior, or you would have more sympathy for this man.

I am not from Utah. I can agree with you that the lds church should be open about its history. I see no problems in lds history. Joseph's polygamy has a good explanation and the timeline of it too. Most lds history is faith promoting. The women who were sealed to Joseph Smith had tremendous testimonies of the principle of plural marriage and some received strong confirmations of its truthfulness when they prayed about it. And not one woman regardless if they left the church or stayed with the church after Joseph Smith was murdered said a bad word about Joseph. No one claimed that Joe was a horny toad and was in it for the lust etc. So, Joseph Smith's polygamy can be rather faith promoting but then again, he was not the only one practicing polygamy at the time in the church. It was a principle that was taught to a few select members during Joseph Smith's lifetime.

And regardless of Joseph's polygamy it does not change the story behind the Book of Mormon and how it came to pass. Nor does it change the testimony of the witnesses and how they never changed their witness to the Book of Mormon and how they confirmed what they saw with their eyes and felt with their hands on their deathbed to family and friends, the Book of Mormon.

Now I am not the greatest Mormon in the world...but I don't know many christians who know the history of their churches, either. And since you are from britain, do you know your own countries history, the real history that is hidden in the archives? But you will still be waving the Kate and William flag on april 29th.

[_why me]

Edit: I went to LDS.org and typed in "Joseph Smith Polygamy" and it returned 54 results. Care to explain this, schlep?

:=)

Not to mention familysearch.org.

[_why me]

Can I just interject that I *love* the use of multiple exclamation points. I'd say three is about the perfect number, but some situations just call for more. ;)

I think that you and I have a lot in common. We do have the same last name: me. If you were my age and we met in NYC in the 70's we could have had a great time together going to plays, movies, the ballet. We would go out to dinner under the NYC lights and had daylight picnics in central park.

[_why me]

Your post is refreshing and it takes away that flu-ish feeling why me's posts give me.

Welcome

Take two aspirin and eat a baked spud. All will be well.

[_Baker]

Your post is refreshing and it takes away that flu-ish feeling why me's posts give me.

Welcome

Take two aspirin and eat a baked spud. All will be well.

Your Jesus builds shopping malls.

[_why me]

Thanks for the welcome, Harmony.

Sorry to have my first post on this forum be such a negative one. Just cannot hold myself back today from trying to support a good person in the church who has been confronted with the discrepancies of all that has become the Mormon church. When will self-righteous Mormons come to the conclusion that they do NOT have all the answers? Those of us who learn the truth late in life are hearing much of this stuff for the first time, mostly BECAUSE WE FOLLOWED THE ADMONITION TO NOT STRAY OUTSIDE OF THE CORRELATED MATERIAL!!! Even when I found out the truth myself, it was from a text one can easily purchase through Deseret Book!

I really appreciate the other posts in this thread. Some darn good information out there...

Hi, Schlepp.

It's inadvisable to take seriously anything posted by Why Me. Since you're new here, I'll fill you in: Why Me is, at best, an inactive Mormon. He's also Catholic. I guess. Perhaps he cannot decide between the two, but know this: when Why Me states that someone else "should have attended Seminary", he's saying it as someone who doesn't even attend church!

Kimberly

I sometimes think of myself as one of the witnesses who strayed from the church but could not deny what they felt and saw with their hands, the Book of Mormon. I got a testimony of the Book of Mormon when I was 18 after praying about it. It was a strong powerful witness. But like some of the witnesses I could not walk down that long road. And like the witnesses I can not deny what I felt. But in their case, what they felt with their hands, and saw with their eyes, the Book of Mormon.

Now when these lapsed witnesses may have been asked if they still confirmed what they saw, why can't they walk down that long road...well, what could they say? Humans are complicated creatures.

But one thing I do know, if I didn't feel what I felt, I would not be here today. I would have been long gone from the church. And if someone brought me into a con about saying what I felt, I would have come clean years ago, especially if my say in the con led people to suffer as happened to the early saints in the lds church. My reputation would not have mattered at all.

Get the picture?