DiscussMormonism.com

From http://www.theofrak.com:

Of course, when you put it like that, it seems weird.

too close for comfort

too close for comfort

Several inaccuracies. Proof left to the student because of OP's Fortigurn's Lazy Research.

One of the better flow charts I've read in a while.

Absolutely hilarious and all Spacey can argue again is what is doctrine and what is not!!!

PS Spacey tweak it all you want and it is still close enough to always to remain absolutely hilarious!!

Absolutely hilarious and all Spacey can argue again is what is doctrine and what is not!!!

Which is quite significant. If it's not doctrine, the only thing you're attacking is a straw man.

bcspace wrote:

Absolutely hilarious and all Spacey can argue again is what is doctrine and what is not!!!

Which is quite significant. If it's not doctrine, the only thing you're attacking is a straw man.

I think it's meant as a joke. It hits the high points of of Mormonism. Remember all those lessons on "Where did we come from, why are we here, where are we going"? As far as I can tell, everything on the flowchart has been taught at one time or another in the church (without the snarkiness). Whoever created it didn't pull it out of thin air. Mormons are so uptight. You need to learn to laugh at yourself now and then.

Perhaps even more amusing would be a similar flowchart for a woman which would end with; the best you can hope for is to be one of many wives to a God. The avatar should show a woman wearing an apron and holding a baby. At the end it should say "Congratulations!!!! You get to pop out babies for eternity and no one will know who the hell you are!

bcspace wrote:

Absolutely hilarious and all Spacey can argue again is what is doctrine and what is not!!!

Which is quite significant. If it's not doctrine, the only thing you're attacking is a straw man.

You might quibble with one or two items. Your version would look no less ridiculous.