Church's political stand on polygamy

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by SteelBlue

I've often thought about how much bigger the church might be right now were it not for our history of polygamy. There's no way to know, but it's an interesting question.

You take away the polygamy issue and the "blacks and the priesthood" issue, then allow coffee, and baptism rates would double. :wink:

[All-American]

Comment number one: Is it possible that the church believes that the most important thing it can do for the salvation of its members and the world is emphasize the importance of the family, irrespective of its previous history?

Comment number two: not too long ago, the doctrine of Jesus Christ as the Lord and Savior was more or less universally acknowledged, if not accepted. Thus, the church emphasized the role of the prophet Joseph Smith, since the more important aspect of the church's doctrine (atonement through Christ) was already fairly well understood-- we just wanted to let the world know how to get access to the atonement. Since then, belief and understanding of the Savior has deteriorated. What direction would you expect the church's teachings to go in?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by All-American

Comment number one: Is it possible that the church believes that the most important thing it can do for the salvation of its members and the world is emphasize the importance of the family, irrespective of its previous history?

Comment number two: not too long ago, the doctrine of Jesus Christ as the Lord and Savior was more or less universally acknowledged, if not accepted. Thus, the church emphasized the role of the prophet Joseph Smith, since the more important aspect of the church's doctrine (atonement through Christ) was already fairly well understood-- we just wanted to let the world know how to get access to the atonement. Since then, belief and understanding of the Savior has deteriorated. What direction would you expect the church's teachings to go in?

I have no particular problem with deemphasis of JS. I'm just making an observation.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have no particular problem with deemphasis of JS. I'm just making an observation.

Won't argue with that. I agree with it, to an extent, but I see it less as a coverup of embarrasing details of the past, and much more an emphasis on a message that is becoming more and more important.