A Scenario for our Male Apologists to Consider...

[_KevinSim]

But I'm glad you recognize at least that the Bible does show him doing some pretty questionable things for someone who's supposed to be perfectly loving and compassionate.

Questionable? What do you mean questionable? That seems to imply that the deity worshipped by the majority of Biblical Christians might be by nature good. At the same time this deity has the power to cause the souls of the unsaved to cease to exist, to put them out of their misery, so to speak, and yet this deity has chosen not to exercise that power.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I could think of a description of a more evil being if I tried. Cylon, can you?

[_KevinSim]

As a follow up question---If you had that mega-heart-to-heart talk with Sandy, and she said to you, "I'm sorry, Kevin, I have tried, and I just can't do this," would you honor her request?

Yes I would. I don't have the strength of Abraham, who was willing to do the will of God regardless of what others thought of him. Sandy's good opinion of me is worth more than even my devotion to God.

If there is a surplus, say of ten percent instead of the fifty percent I originally postulated, and God told us He wanted us to welcome another wife into the family, and Sandy were to say that, perhaps I would tell God that I understand the need for the principle, but that I was unwilling to jeopardize my relationship with Sandy over it. I'm sure God would understand.

[_Cylon]

But I'm glad you recognize at least that the Bible does show him doing some pretty questionable things for someone who's supposed to be perfectly loving and compassionate.

Questionable? What do you mean questionable? That seems to imply that the deity worshipped by the majority of Biblical Christians might be by nature good. At the same time this deity has the power to cause the souls of the unsaved to cease to exist, to put them out of their misery, so to speak, and yet this deity has chosen not to exercise that power.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I could think of a description of a more evil being if I tried. Cylon, can you?

Oh, I'm sure I could if I tried. But I'm not really that interested in digging deep into the theological underpinnings of God within a framework that I never subscribed to myself. My use of the word questionable, though, was a massive understatement used to avoid giving offense, but I guess I needn't have bothered.

[_Yoda]

As a follow up question---If you had that mega-heart-to-heart talk with Sandy, and she said to you, "I'm sorry, Kevin, I have tried, and I just can't do this," would you honor her request?

Yes I would. I don't have the strength of Abraham, who was willing to do the will of God regardless of what others thought of him. Sandy's good opinion of me is worth more than even my devotion to God.

If there is a surplus, say of ten percent instead of the fifty percent I originally postulated, and God told us He wanted us to welcome another wife into the family, and Sandy were to say that, perhaps I would tell God that I understand the need for the principle, but that I was unwilling to jeopardize my relationship with Sandy over it. I'm sure God would understand.

So do I.

Sandy has a good husband.

[_harmony]

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I could think of a description of a more evil being if I tried. Cylon, can you?

Sure. Lots of evil in the world. For example, moving hundreds of women across country, and then after they can't get back where they started, springing it on them that their husbands are going to be taking more wives.

Some evil is really twisted.

[_KevinSim]

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I could think of a description of a more evil being if I tried. Cylon, can you?

Sure. Lots of evil in the world. For example, moving hundreds of women across country, and then after they can't get back where they started, springing it on them that their husbands are going to be taking more wives.

Some evil is really twisted.

Any finite amount of anguish, can be justified. An infinite amount of suffering, cannot be justified.

The women that crossed the plains had to endure a lot. I personally don't know what their attitude toward polygamy was in the 1840s and 1850s, but let's assume it was incredibly painful for the vast majority of them. Is it possible that they gained from the experience, that they learned things that would help them in the eternities? Is it possible that God could turn their lives around, from severe pain to extreme joy? Of course it is!

On the other hand, the unsaved suffering unbearable agony forever, like Biblical Christians say they do, end up suffering unbearable agony forever. Nothing good will come of it, not for them, not for God, not for anyone else.

If one can't be sure that God would put the unsaved out of their misery, if God had the power to do that, then what can one be sure of about a good God?

[_harmony]

Is it possible that they gained from the experience, that they learned things that would help them in the eternities?

When you're treated like a thing, we can talk. When you're told that God loves his sons more than you, we can talk. When you're worth less than a cow, we can talk.

I don't think you get it, Kevin. And I'm sorry to say, I don't think you ever will.

[_KevinSim]

When you're treated like a thing, we can talk. When you're told that God loves his sons more than you, we can talk. When you're worth less than a cow, we can talk.

I don't think you get it, Kevin. And I'm sorry to say, I don't think you ever will.

Harmony, I get that in the LDS Church you've been treated like a thing, that you've been told that God loves his sons more than you, and that you've been valued as less than a cow. That seems kind of bizarre to me, because after spending significant time in eleven wards in three states, I've never seen any indication that women were treated like that; I guess it's possible that they were and I just didn't notice it.

I married a woman whose father told her she could accomplish anything with her life that she wanted to. Obviously he wasn't telling her that she was going to be the first female bishop or stake president, but she took what her father told her seriously, and she's been very self-assurred her whole life. There's no way she would tolerate being "treated like a thing," being "told that God loves his sons more than" her, or being valued as "less than a cow."

I'm not entirely convinced by the philosophy of Nietzche that anything that doesn't kill one should make that one stronger. I think, as you say, sometimes being treated as you have been treated can do serious damage. But I do think that even the people who have been treated the worst of all humanity can significantly improve their lives by refusing to accept the labels other people have given them. Each person needs to do some thinking on her/his own, and realize s/he has worth completely independent of what her/his peers say.

Kind of curious, Harmony; do you still think I don't get it?

[_harmony]

Kind of curious, Harmony; do you still think I don't get it?

What if your wife really thinks she should have the priesthood too? Thinks she should be able to be the mouthpiece when you bless your baby in front of the ward? Thinks she should be able to pursue a career while you stay home, tending to what is now considered "women's work"? Thinks she wouldn't turn down the calling of "bishop" of your ward?

When we sustain the first female bishop, I'll say you get it. Until then, well... remember that you'll never be the target of an old prophet's remark about cows.

[_KevinSim]

Harmony,

I've been involved in talking with critics of the LDS Church for a very long time. In 1999 it started taking a toll on me; I started wondering what I would do if I should in fact discover that God hadn't inspired the LDS Church. I certainly wouldn't leave the LDS Church and join an existing group; I was reasonably certain no such group existed that I would find more acceptable than the LDS Church. So I started thinking about what an acceptable group would look like. I came up with an idea for a group that would have fully diverse leadership; both women and men would be involved in all levels of leadership; heck, gays and lesbians would be involved in all levels of leadership.

1999 also, it turned out, was a time when I found myself unemployed for a pretty significant stretch. I couldn't find a job no matter where I looked. It became more and more clear to me that my faith group was a very real possibility of something I could use to earn a living. I was seriously thinking of starting it up.

I told my wife what I was thinking, and she was vehemently opposed. After begging me to stop considering it I ended up promising her I wouldn't start up this faith group. I'd find some other way to earn a living.

2003 was another year without a job. Once again I started seriously thinking about using my faith group idea as a way to earn money. Once again I told my wife what I was thinking. She reminded me that I had promised her back in 1999 that I wouldn't pursue this idea, and asked me how many of the other promises I had made to her that I wasn't planning on keeping. Perhaps needless to say, in 2003 I promised her again that I wasn't going to do the faith group thing.

What if your wife really thinks she should have the priesthood too? Thinks she should be able to be the mouthpiece when you bless your baby in front of the ward? Thinks she should be able to pursue a career while you stay home, tending to what is now considered "women's work"? Thinks she wouldn't turn down the calling of "bishop" of your ward?

When we sustain the first female bishop, I'll say you get it. Until then, well... remember that you'll never be the target of an old prophet's remark about cows.

First "female bishop"? Look, Harmony, I can spearhead things a lot better than I can lead them. If I were to start up my faith group, of necessity I'd have to be the first overall leader, but that would last about what, six months? Then the overall leader would be chosen by a democratic election, and I would just as soon vote for a woman as I would for a man. Bishop in the LDS Church is a local leader; I would gladly sustain a woman who was democratically elected to take over the non-elected global position I had held for those six months.

What if my "wife really thinks she should have the priesthood too," if she thinks "she should be able to be the mouthpiece when" she blesses our "baby in front of the ward," if she thinks "she wouldn't turn down the calling of 'bishop' of" our ward? Then I'd remind her of the faith group I told her about back in 1999 and then again in 2003, and I'd ask her if she was still opposed to me forming that faith group.

I get it, Harmony. I'm ready to sustain the first female bishop, the first female stake president, the first female area president, all the way up the line to the first female prophet. Just get my wife to release me from the promise I made her, and you'll see all four of those female leaders.