Godly Concession and the Restoration Contract

Post by **_Maxrep** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:54 am

Well, at least its an attempt. That would be great if this little gem saw the light of day in print. I especially liked the portion where Joseph "may" have been pleading with the lord, "Please don't make me fornicate with these married women while their husbands are out serving missions for you".

Is this really going to improve Joseph's image? Is the usage of the word "vestigial" supposed to garner credibility? Imagine showing a few paragraphs like these to an individual struggling with polygamy - its just going to push them over the edge! Ha, what a farce indeed!

Post by **_Mister Scratch** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 4:25 am

While I grant that this is just a rough draft which is essentially still in the larval stage, I do have to take my hat off to whomever penned this. The honesty is quite refreshing, and I'm particularly impressed at the willingness of this/these Mopologists to finally own up to the fact that Joseph Smith (likely) "consummated" his polygamous relationships.

Post by **_The Dude** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:15 am

I love the word "vestigial". I will definitely work it in next time I give a seminar.

And about that cross posting rule, I think it's out-dated as are many other rules from days of yore-FAIR. I think Charity did right by letting the MADites know what's coming down the prophet-pipe of Mopologetics. They will need to do some extra stetching exercises ahead of time -- to meet the demands of forthcoming mental gymnastics.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:45 am

Gadianton wrote:Well Nehor, as joseph's life becomes more and more comon knowledge and the old tactic of "you got that from anti-mormon history not real history" loses credibility, what is going to be the reaction of the church? I think they'll say nothing, neither confirm or deny, and let FARMS field it the best they can and hope something works. I give the MI and bushman credit for honesty in their objective, but it's not really an honest objective, if you know what I mean.

This sounds like someone reinventing the 'historical Jesus'. If Joseph was correct and no one knows his history or what he believes I seriously doubt these yahoos figured it out.

Post by **_Maxrep** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:57 am

truth dancer wrote:Just when I think the excuse making can't get any worse, it does. I don't even know how these guys can come up with this sort of thing.

It truly boggles the mind, and leaves me feeling sick.

~dancer~

As Gods in embryo, is this what we have to look forward to? Our spirit children are consigned to take part in some manner of twisted role playing for the simple purpose of retroactively fulfilling immoral symbolism from the past? What purpose is really served?

If God exists in the Christian realm, I have to believe that he/she possesses virtuous attributes that are steadfast, that there are principles and laws that children of God can align themselves with. Proxy fornication for traditions sake on behalf of things done in the past?

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:59 am

I agree with The Dude: Charity did the right thing by cross-posting it at MA&D. They need to (finally) know that the critics are right, that Joseph really did consummate his plural marriages.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:03 am

Dr. Shades wrote:I agree with The Dude: Charity did the right thing by cross-posting it at MA&D. They need to (finally) know that the critics are right, that Joseph really did consummate his plural marriages.

I don't get it....I've assumed for years he consumated most, if not all of them. The only reason given for plural marriage in our canon is to 'raise up seed'.

Post by **_Dr. Shades** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:52 am

The Nehor wrote:I don't get it....I've assumed for years he consumated most, if not all of them. The only reason given for plural marriage in our canon is to 'raise up seed'.

You may have assumed that, but the MA&Dites generally don't.

Post by **_Sethbag** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:56 am

Well, this is the kind of thing you get when you have millions of well-meaning believers who are doing the best they can to explain and understand their faith. They've chosen to believe it, they are presented with some problematic facts, and so they spend time working out ways to "reframe" the issues, come up with explanations like in the OP, and otherwise mitigate the problems and leave a veneer of plausibility. This is what it's about. And you better believe that there are people like this in every single religion on Earth. This is how it works. Religion isn't just an idea, it's also a practice, and a mindset, of real, living people, and these people spend a lot of time working out the kinks and whatnot.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:19 am

Sethbag wrote:Well, this is the kind of thing you get when you have millions of well-meaning believers who are doing the best they can to explain and understand their faith. They've chosen to believe it, they are presented with some problematic facts, and so they spend time working out ways to "reframe" the issues, come up with explanations like in the OP, and otherwise mitigate the problems and leave a veneer of plausibility. This is what it's about. And you better believe that there are people like this in every single religion on Earth. This is how it works. Religion isn't just an idea, it's also a practice, and a mindset, of real, living people, and these people spend a lot of time working out the kinks and whatnot.

I didn't know sex was such a problematical problem.