Human Deification--Why did GBH downplay it?

[_moksha]

It would first help if we answered the question of whether polygamy was something God requested or just a ruse to explain away sexual dalliances. If the latter was concluded then subsequent extensions of this ruse are obviously speculations.

What's your answer to this question, moksha?

Hindsight would suggest it best to go with the Book of Mormon answer that polygamy is naughty.

[_Nevo]

Hmm. I hate to be so obvious, but President Hinkley said, "I don't know that we teach it." But then you say "the doctrine is still taught" and give examples. Which of you is correct?

A search of LDS.org shows that it appeared in Ensign articles in 1971, 1979, 1982, 1989, 1993, and 2006. It was also cited in Melchizedek Priesthood/Relief Society lessons in 2008 and 2011. In other words, an active Latter-day Saint may hear the doctrine mentioned in passing once every three to ten years or so. I cannot recall it ever being mentioned in General Conference. The Church's official compendium of correlated doctrine, True to the Faith, doesn't say a word about it.

So, is it taught? That depends how you look at it. It occasionally appears in Church publications but it is not a core doctrine of the Church and receives no mention at all in conference talks, missionary lessons, or the vast majority of Church meetings.

[_Gadianton]

Nevo,

Sorry bud, but that's because it's one of those "secret doctrines" that everyone knows to be true, but no one talks about openly because it's too sacred. And you know it. If you don't know this, then that's because you're either a convert, or have become such an Internet Mormon that you've completely lost touch with your religion and have split off into a new sect.

[_Pollypinks]

Thanks for clearing the God image up for me. I did feel that the church still taught that we could all become gods and goddesses, but have been out of the loop so long I didn't have the proof.

[_sock puppet]

So, is it taught? That depends how you look at it. It occasionally appears in Church publications but it is not a core doctrine of the Church and receives no mention at all in conference talks, missionary lessons, or the vast majority of Church meetings.

That's an honest answer. Too bad GBH did not have as developed of a conscience for honesty as you have, Nevo.

[_hatersinmyward]

Too bad GBH did not have as developed of a conscience for honesty as you have, Nevo.

In a seperate 1997 interview GBH gave he stated the chuch only gives yearly financial holding reports to the members.

I recall after that, my old man switched back to the d-news. Citing the trib was publishing a false account of the interview.