Reorganized LDS

[MikeWaters]

I never knew before that one of their central tenets was that Joseph Smith never introduced polygamy. They held this position until very recently, apparently. Now their historians grudgingly admit that Joseph Smith introduced it and practiced it.

Imagine the gyrations and mental gymnastics they carried out for all those years.

I think the amazing thing is that RLDS exists at all, even its present pathetic watered down form.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I never knew before that one of their central tenets was that Joseph Smith never introduced polygamy. They held this position until very recently, apparently. Now their historians grudgingly admit that Joseph Smith introduced it and practiced it.

Imagine the gyrations and mental gymnastics they carried out for all those years.

I think the amazing thing is that RLDS exists at all, even its present pathetic watered down form.

Yes, indeed. In fact, at one point there was a big battle between the LDS and RLDS about whether or not JS practiced polygamy (late 1800's I believe). The LDS folks kept having people in Utah (typically former JS wives) write up avidavits swearing that JS taught polygamy. Kind of ironic that we now downplay that fact. I certainly don't recally any significant mention of polygamy in my tour of Nauvoo a couple of years ago.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Yes, indeed. In fact, at one point there was a big battle between the LDS and RLDS about whether or not JS practiced polygamy (late 1800's I believe). The LDS folks kept having people in Utah (typically former JS wives) write up avidavits swearing that JS taught polygamy. Kind of ironic that we now downplay that fact. I certainly don't recally any significant mention of polygamy in my tour of Nauvoo a couple of years ago.

How many gymnastics are the LDS leaders and FARMS going to go through defending the Book of Abraham as an accurate translation when the rest of the world knows the three facsimiles have actual explanations which are entirely different than J. Smiths "translation"?

Splinter meet beam.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by hyrum

How many gymnastics are the LDS leaders and FARMS going to go through defending the Book of Abraham as an accurate translation when the rest of the world knows the three facsimiles have actual explanations which are entirely different than J. Smiths "translation"?

Splinter meet beam.

You might have a case if there were only three explainations for the three facsimiles.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by All-American

You might have a case if there were only three explainations for the three facsimiles.

So you think the facsimiles are depictions of Abraham's life?

[MikeWaters]

why would anyone who acknowledges that Joseph Smith did not literally learn an ancient language and translate words he saw written down (plates) into the Book of Mormon (i.e. one argues he did it through inspiration) get bent out of shape over Joseph Smith using papyri as a source for further revelation?

it seems like such an assinine thing to argue. You either have faith or you don't. I'm don't understand why the PoGP changes anything, as compared to the BoM. Is there this contingent of people that have full faith in the BoM but doubt the PoGP?

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

why would anyone who acknowledges that Joseph Smith did not literally learn an ancient language and translate words he saw written down (plates) into the Book of Mormon (i.e. one argues he did it through inspiration) get bent out of shape over Joseph Smith using papyri as a source for further revelation?

For a non-believer, it serves as 'evidence' that Joseph was a fraud.

For a believer, it, IMO, calls into question the translation of the BOM. How authentic was the translation of the BOM when Joseph was unable to translate a different text?

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

it seems like such an assinine thing to argue. You either have faith or you don't. I'm don't understand why the PoGP changes anything, as compared to the BoM. Is there this contingent of people that have full faith in the BoM but doubt the PoGP?

I wouldn't think so. I would think though, that there is a contingent of people who lose faith in the BOA and subsequently lose faith in the BOM.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

I wouldn't think so. I would think though, that there is a contingent of people who lose faith in the BOA and subsequently lose faith in the BOM.

Then these are people who don't understand how the BoM was translated, not to mention don't understand the nature of faith and personal revelation.

How we come to belief is different for different people. If your belief is based on logic, explanations, etc. you are very likely to reject notions of Kolob, Book of Abraham, etc. If your belief is based on a process of personal revelation (which is hardly based in logic) then that is something entirely different.

You have two mains kinds of non-believers:

1. This stuff doesn't make sense.
2. God told me this stuff isn't right.

That is why I would submit that someone who states belief in Book of Mormon, but rejects Mormonism based on the Book of Abraham is likely of the 1st category. In which case, I would argue, they were likely to end up falling away anyway (or at least never have reached a high level of faith).

I explain this from the perspective of someone who believes in personal revelation (God to Man).

If one want reasons to leave, one is sure to find them. But don't tell us how smart you are to have found them.

[fusnik11]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You have two mains kinds of non-believers:

1. This stuff doesn't make sense.
2. God told me this stuff isn't right.

That is why I would submit that someone who states belief in Book of Mormon, but rejects Mormonism based on the Book of Abraham is likely of the 1st category. In which case, I would argue, they were likely to end up falling away anyway (or at least never have reached a high level of faith).

Do you not believe in further light and knowledge? Some people and sincerely believe a certain way only to receive further light and knowledge that lead them to chase different rainbows.

That's the beauty of the restored gospel, Joseph taught us the the heavens aren't seperated by prophets and apostles who hold the keys of heaven, he gave us those keys and taught that one can unlock the mysteries of godliness and have a direct relationship with God, bypassing the prophets and apostles.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Do you not believe in further light and knowledge? Some people and sincerely believe a certain way only to receive further light and knowledge that lead them to chase different rainbows.

That's the beauty of the restored gospel, Joseph taught us the the heavens aren't seperated by prophets and apostles who hold the keys of heaven, he gave us those keys and taught that one can unlock the mysteries of godliness and have a direct relationship with God, bypassing the prophets and apostles.

nice non sequitur.

yes, there are all kinds of crazy. I like my crazy best. and not all craziness is equal.