Was my initial post really a thread hijack?
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck. . . . . . . .
You come into the religious forum essentially asking why there are people questioning anothers religion and pointing out its very obvious flaws...
If there were to be no religious debate on FR, if it were not important for many here, I doubt FR would have a Religion Forum.
Sometimes it pays to know where one is...
Yes. Godzilla made several good pts. Look at this: We have long been discussing w/many posts the "ExPat etiquette" standard for which articles we can or can't post without being labeled as 'divisive,' and if advocating someone coming out of a religion is 'attacking' that religion or not.
ExPat, I thought we lived in a land of Free Republic where Free Republic expression was encouraged, not chastised or scolded as if we lived in some less-than-FR land.
I'm with Godzilla...moving at least my discussion back to the article topic at hand:
I think this nun showed discernment in realizing men & women can't become gods. And she was right in labeling this a "make or break" issue upon which the rest of the beliefs tumble.
If Smith was wrong about becoming a god, a statement he made when he was supposedly most mature in his life-- and not something (the afterlife) you trifle with when explaining at a funeral -- then he was wrong on everything else. IOW, the real consequential choice isn't, "Do I remain a cultural Mormon or not?" The real consequential reality is, "If I can't reach godhood, then Mormonism as a belief system is -- and never was -- legitimately erected. It's a sandy foundation."