Mormonism is Now the Most Retrograde Religion in America.

[_Ray A]

A tortured conscience needs this kind of fodder doesn't it Ray?

No, Droppy. It's not "tortured conscience" that motivates me. Just the kind of people Eric Hoffer warned us about in 1951.

[_Ray A]

Decker's interpretation of the words spoken were "Wonderful Lucifer".

Even the Tanner's couldn't stomach that.

Decker isn't at issue here at all.

[_Ray A]

You've already admitted that "Bishops like yourself" never made the letter public in any great numbers, so its no wonder that the "backlash" is a figment of your imagination (which is probably why, in some 26 years since it was circulated, neither I nor anybody I know in the Church have ever heard of such a backlash or participated in it).

So the FP retracted it because they just wanted something to do. Bored. I see.

This was the "interpretation" of the First Presidency of the time. You've already admitted it was not doctrine and, as such, was not binding upon the general membership of the Church.

You sound like BC.

Is there a prevailing scholarly view of oral sex?

Is there a prevailing scholarly view of the Three Nephites?

[_Droopy]

A tortured conscience needs this kind of fodder doesn't it Ray?

No, Droppy. It's not "tortured conscience" that motivates me. Just the kind of people Eric Hoffer warned us about in 1951.

I'm frankly more concerned about the kind of people Jesus Christ warned us about in Matt. 7:15 and 2 Tim. 3: 1-8, with a particular emphasis on verse 5.

[_Ray A]

I'm frankly more concerned about the kind of people Jesus Christ warned us about in Matt. 7:15 and 2 Tim. 3: 1-8, with a particular emphasis on verse 5.

I'd be more worried about tomorrow's weather forecast.

[_Mister Scratch]

A lot of things in Mormonism are secret, or kept "on the down-low". By your logic, Droopy, you ought to consider things such as the Gold Plates to be "imaginary," since you, personally, had no actual exposure to them.

In other words, not a shred of evidence exists for the "backlash".

Just as I proverbially thought.

There is plenty of evidence, you just need to do your research. Ray's posting of M. Watson's letter is but one example. Once again you are proving just how much time you have frittered away reading hardcore right-wing pablum, and, you are showing how lazy you are when it comes to researching topics that challenge your stubborn paradigm. Next I expect that you'll claim Kinderhook never happened simply because you've never heard of it.

[_Sethbag]

Decker's interpretation of the words spoken were "Wonderful Lucifer".

Even the Tanner's couldn't stomach that.

Of course the words didn't mean Wonderful Lucifer. They didn't actually mean anything at all - they were made up crap. But they were claimed to mean "Oh God, hear the words of my mouth".

If you still deny that words sounding like "pay lay el" or "pay lay ale" (since it was spoken, not written, by any of us, it's hard to put a finger on the exact best spelling) were spoken as part of the endowment ceremony before the changes in 1990, then you have absolutely no credibility. I know they were spoken in that version of the ceremony, because I spoke them myself - many times. And so did a lot of others on this board. You have nowhere to squirm to on this one. It blows my mind you would still be claiming this - it really does call into question a hell of a lot about your religious past. That, or your memory.

[_Runtu]

Of course the words didn't mean Wonderful Lucifer. They didn't actually mean anything at all - they were made up crap. But they were claimed to mean "Oh God, hear the words of my mouth".

If you still deny that words sounding like "pay lay el" or "pay lay ale" (since it was spoken, not written, by any of us, it's hard to put a finger on the exact best spelling) were spoken as part of the endowment ceremony before the changes in 1990, then you have absolutely no credibility. I know they were spoken in that version of the ceremony, because I spoke them myself - many times. And so did a lot of others on this board. You have nowhere to squirm to on this one. It blows my mind you would still be claiming this - it really does call into question a hell of a lot about your religious past. That, or your memory.

for what it's worth, I went to a session in the Provo temple many years ago that was a "deaf" session. They had the film going, plus two TV monitors, one to each side of the veil, showing a man signing the words of the endowment and a subtitle crawl along the bottom of the screen.

The spelling was something like "pe'h le el."

And I second your assessment of Droopy's bizarre denial of this. I went through the temple literally hundreds of times before they made the changes. We said it every single time.

[_Trevor]

Or perhaps Mormon apologetics?

[_Droopy]

I never said them as some are attempting to describe them. I said them in the English language. That is what I have claimed.

Now, please all of you {Moderator edit by harmony: no personal attacks}

Thanks.