moksha wrote: "Yeah, Joseph had some problems keeping it in his pants, but he was still our Prophet".
There was an old Russian joke...
From the "Our Listeners Wrote" of Radio Moscow - Is it true that Tchaikovsky was homosexual? Our answer: - It is, but this is not we like him for.
- 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
My favorite response from Brian Hales included this gem (grammar in original):
. . . I do not find him guilty of any egregious sins like adultery, hypocrisy, or many of the outlandish things critics have charged. Admittedly some of his decisions are now a little difficult to understand. If I could go back in time, I might make five recommendations Joseph:
Carefully consider marrying Fanny Alger without telling Emma. If possible, convince the angel that Emma needs to be involved from the start.
Carefully consider being sealed to fourteen-year-old plural wives even if the marriages are not consummated. It might generate accusations of pedophilia a hundred years later.
Carefully consider being sealed to legally married women even if for eternity only. Encouraging those women to be sealed to other priesthood holders, including their civil husbands, if worthy, may be a better choice.
Carefully consider the number of plural wives you marry. Even if Old Testament patriarchs had dozens of plural wives, limiting your wives, whether for eternity only or time and eternity, might be more easily understood by observers years later.
Carefully consider limiting your involvement in politics. Letting someone else be mayor of Nauvoo may insulate you from liability in dealing with the Nauvoo Expositor.
Note that he didn't say "carefully RE-consider."
For my money, my absolute favorite is this part of #1: "Convince the angel that Emma needs to be involved from the start." 'Cause obviously the angel hadn't considered that approach. Perhaps Joseph could've also convinced the angel to go back to God's presence and convince God that Emma should be involved, since God most likely sent the angel off without really thinking things through beforehand.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
It is a well thought out blog and some good points were brought up. It is hard to argue with the following:
So, so much pain and anguish could have been avoided during the restoration had polygamy never entered the scene. It demoted women to tally marks in an eternal harem, it caused countless children to not have a constant father figure in their home, and created unthinkably complicated and harmful family dynamics.
sunstoned wrote:It is a well thought out blog and some good points were brought up. It is hard to argue with the following:
So, so much pain and anguish could have been avoided during the restoration had polygamy never entered the scene. It demoted women to tally marks in an eternal harem, it caused countless children to not have a constant father figure in their home, and created unthinkably complicated and harmful family dynamics.
Not to mention there were some beautifully crafted bed posts which were totally ruined by repeatedly carving notches in them!
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.
A bit more appalling is the insane drivel that Brian and Laura spews out in the comments sections. To me he appears more like a "hired hand" trying to do damage control for the corporation, than a sincere person.
I stand amazed at the spinning loops he is trying to knit into testimony rescuing logic..
Just like Joseph Smith needed older women to lure the young ones into polygamy, here we have a pair of clowns trying to lure the "want to believers" into a state of faithful security.
Brian Hales seems to reason that since we havent found any Go-Pro videos from Joseph Smith "multiplying" with his younger or polyandrous wives, then he probably didn't.
Uther
About Joseph Smith.. How do you think his persona was influenced by being the storyteller since childhood? Mastering the art of going pale, changing his voice, and mesmerizing his audience.. How do you think he was influenced by keeping secrets and lying for his wife and the church members for decades?
Uther wrote:Brian Hales seems to reason that since we haven't found any Go-Pro videos from Joseph Smith "multiplying" with his younger or polyandrous wives, then he probably didn't.
This is probably a safe assumption, since throughout recorded history we know that men (the male of the species) have always hated sex, and there has never been any credible examples of men just having sexual desires for a woman purely for the wanton sexual gratification that some men receive through coitus. Certainly you can see how our exalted prophet, even Joseph Smith, had nothing but the most pure intentions to these lovely daughters of Zion and would never reduce himself or them to the carnal lusts of the flesh. (See even a dumb Emu can spin the narrative).
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.
souldier wrote:...if there is a God, we cannot comprehend or describe Him/Her/It so it's useless to even try.
The thing is, if there is a God, Him/Her/It has been active in the world for a long time. Unless you believe that God would create everything and then just not care about or interact with His creations. So for a moment, let's imagine that God is active in the world. What would that LOOK like? If you don't see any evidence of God working in the world...what do you do with that? Simply choose to not believe? Or accept the possibility that the world, as it is, demonstrates, or is the result, of HOW God works in the world...and try and decipher it. One thing right off the bat...if you're open to there being a creator God...is that the world is a very messy place in many respects.
And for what reason? Would God want us to find it "useless to even try" to figure some things out?
I don't think so. And I'd hazard a guess that God would even drop some easter eggs
Gray Ghost wrote:It's very tempting to create God in our own images - but I think God is much bigger than that.
I hope you're right, because I am finding myself in the 'Deist' camp, wanting to believe in a God, but having no idea about who, or what, that God is.
As far as being tempted to create God in our own image, I believe that temptation has come and gone. We were tempted, we gave into the temptation, and we are now saddled with this white-haired bastard named Elohim, who will help us find out keys, but won't lift a finger to help masses of humanity out of their murderous plight.
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.
Gray Ghost wrote:It's very tempting to create God in our own images - but I think God is much bigger than that.
I hope you're right, because I am finding myself in the 'Deist' camp, wanting to believe in a God, but having no idea about who, or what, that God is.
As far as being tempted to create God in our own image, I believe that temptation has come and gone. We were tempted, we gave into the temptation, and we are now saddled with this white-haired bastard named Elohim, who will help us find out keys, but won't lift a finger to help masses of humanity out of their murderous plight.
Yes, it's a struggle. I think the idea of a God as a person is unsustainable in the long run, as comforting as it is sometimes to think of God as a kind of father figure that you can tell your troubles to. The fact is that blessings and cursings are never handed out equitably. And we can't count on miracles to save us.
Personally, I don't place any division between creator and creation. I think of God as being the absolute transcendent "one". "One" meaning, the entirety of existence and things and events. All of it is one.
Whenever we try to think of God as a person who judges and compares and blesses and damns and creates and destroys, we're really making a God of ourselves. Humans do those things. God is bigger.
Gray Ghost wrote:Whenever we try to think of God as a person who judges and compares and blesses and damns and creates and destroys, we're really making a God of ourselves. Humans do those things. God is bigger.
This is helping me refine and define my ideas of God. Please don't stop!
A friendship that requires agreement in all things, is not worthy of the term friendship.