From Deseret News. The church knows they messed up historically:

Prior to 1978, Elder Bruce R. McConkie, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, the LDS Church's second highest governing council, was the most vocal defender of this kind of racial theology.

Yet just months after the 1978 end of the ban, Elder McConkie told an audience at BYU, "Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young … or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding."
https://www.deseret.com/2012/2/29/20396699/race-folklore-and-mormon-doctrine

The church essentially breeds a bunch of Yes Men. “When the prophet has spoken, the thinking has been done.” I don’t say that to chastise BRMcC, but simply to point out the fact that his beliefs changed according to the currently held church narrative. We will see this with many things particularly gays, technology and the 2020 narrative.

Brain death is the key to salvation.

All my colleagues are now giving me strange looks :-D



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2024 07:45AM by Soft Machine.

2015: children of same sex couples can’t get baptized until they’re 18, and even then only if they disavow their parents’ relationship.

2016: that policy came directly from God (according to Russell M. Nelson).

2019: God changed his mind about that policy after we pleaded with him (again, according to Russell M. Nelson)

Only an org in a tailspin would (can) allow and/or tolerate this stuff; they're Obviously making everything up as external situations circumstances present.

Revelation seems to come when the church loses a cultural battle. Polygamy becomes illegal. Racism is no longer acceptable. Gay marriage becomes legal.

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Revelation seems to come when the church loses a
> cultural battle. Polygamy becomes illegal. Racism
> is no longer acceptable. Gay marriage becomes
> legal.

Great point.

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Revelation seems to come when the church loses a
> cultural battle. Polygamy becomes illegal. Racism
> is no longer acceptable. Gay marriage becomes
> legal.

Their main influence seems to be whether something is legal or illegal then. (Or fashionable.) Neither of these propositions are good guides to behavior. There are many bad things which are legal, and some things which should be legal and aren't.

They may get a nasty shock with polygamy. I've a feeling that it may be legalized at some point in the next few decade for various reasons.

>> I've a feeling that it may be legalized at some point in the next few decade for various reasons.

I don't see it. There is no social "good" to polygamy. In the past, it has led to neglect of wives, abuse of young women, and the casting out of minor boys who represent a threat to the older men. It's also led to the abuse of government resources.

It's also not an established part of American culture. The first word that most nevermos will associate with Mormonism is "polygamy," and it's not a good association. It is not respected.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >> I've a feeling that it may be legalized at some
> point in the next few decade for various reasons.
>
> I don't see it. There is no social "good" to
> polygamy. In the past, it has led to neglect of
> wives, abuse of young women, and the casting out
> of minor boys who represent a threat to the older
> men. It's also led to the abuse of government
> resources.
>
> It's also not an established part of American
> culture. The first word that most nevermos will
> associate with Mormonism is "polygamy," and it's
> not a good association. It is not respected.

Well neither was gay marriage but that got legalized. SSM led to a number of debates about what marriage is, and it challenged the notion that it only meant "one man and one woman". So there is one legal precedent.

Secondly, Muslims and other religions have polygamy as part of their culture, and I think it is likely that there will be a legal challenge from that quarter. I've no doubt at some point, a Muslim will claim it is a government infringement of his/her religious beliefs.

Thirdly, "polyamory" and "throuples" are the in thing in the media just now. The law already recognizes that someone may have sex with multiple partners and even have children by multiple partners. What is the difference between polygamy and several people living together in a commune and having children with one another? Not much, just legal definitions.

So, no I don't think it will be anything to do with Mormonism. But it will be funny if they have to backtrack. Behind the curve as usual.

Regardless of the lies the church tells the pure unadulterated truthis this.

The Book of Abraham clearly and distinctly states that the descendants of Ham, that is the Blacks, cannot hold the priesthood.

This is the writing of Joseph Smith Jr himself. It claims the ban was almost from the beginning of human history.

The church has never addressed the ban in the Book of Abraham, it simply ignores it and blames others.

Likewise, the Book of Moses, written by Joseph Smith Jr states that the mark of Cain is black skin and that the righteous men prior to the flood, did not proceslyite among the blacks.

Lastly, Joseph writes in the Book of Abraham that Egyptus, the wife of Ham, preserved the curse of Cain in the land as she eas black.

The church refuses to own up to the ban being both scripture and authored by Joseph Smith Jr.

I think over time, they will view the BoM as they view the Book of Abraham now.

They will blame, spin, ignore, downplay and act like it was never accurate or important. Most members won't know or care what it was about.

The BoM will be to Mormons as the Malleus Maleficarum is to Catholics. Most Catholics don't care one bit what their church taught about witchcraft.

Does ChurchCo acknowledge that Joe either ordained hisself or authorized the ordination of 1 or more blacks while he was alive?

Perhaps when they decided to send missionaries to the South, the backlash put an end to ordaining blacks (and therefore that blacks with the PH had any sort of dominion over others (males) who didn't have the PH?

Details, details, details!

ETA: I didn't realize that wiki has a long, detailed article of info on this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/01/2024 09:17AM by GNPE.

There are always the perennial back stops….it’s too sacred to talk about…some things are not for us to know….it will all be made clear in the next life…they were speaking as men…don’t ponder the mysteries it isn’t pertinent to your salvation…seems to work just great for the majority who still call themselves mormons…no I won’t type out that long name no can say…as for plygmy….if you haven’t enjoyed enough tird sammiches by all means have some more….free agency and all that really doesn’t exist under the Mormon umbrella