You are true.subgenius wrote: in my previous post on the matter:
"We spoke with a limited understanding"
Why to suspect malignancy, when the explanation is a simple stupidity.
Can speak the prophets of The Only True Church with limited understanding?
According to Your "explanation" (copyright McConkie), they can.
Did they do that in the case of priesthood - and other things - for blacks?
According to Your "explanation", they did.
by the way nobody knows that doctrine...LDS First Presidency (George Albert Smith) wrote:“Your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and white races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs until now.... there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this area, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.”
Did they do that in the case of polygamy?
John Taylor, September 27, 1886 wrote: My son John: You have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant and how far it is binding upon my people.
Thus saith the Lord All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant.
For I the Lord am everlasting and my covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with; but they stand forever.
Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject?
Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandment, and yet have I borne with them these many years and this because of their weakness because of the perilous times. And furthermore it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters.
Nevertheless I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not.
And as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph all those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law.
And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham's seed and would enter into my glory they must do the works of Abraham.
I have not revoked this law nor will I for it is everlasting and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof, even so Amen.
Can they speak that way now?
Or tomorrow? Or the day after tomorrow?
How can we determine - listening the conference talks - which sentence is a product of limited understanding, which is a product of divine omniscience?
-------------------------------------------------
No mistake.glad to read that even our image-posting-impeded*** brethren can offer such a fine example of mistaking apples for oranges
Yes, there are apples, oranges and - to pick one other fruit - plums.
Different fruits, but all of them fruits.
They bring forth in different time.
Under Brigham Young, there were no negroes - under Thomas Monson there are no polygamists.
Some people don't like every fruit.
Probably no gay person was polygamist in the 1860s...
All of them fruits, maggoty products of the same gardeners.
*** Thank You for my epithet, my ellipse-hypertrophy-sufferer brethren.
