Replies

What's also telling is how far your moral compass is off... ...instead of being digusted how Joseph Smith forced himself upon 14 yo and 16 yo like Lucy Walker -- a girl whose mother had died & whose father was sent to the east coast by Smith... ...instead of being disgusted by how Smith "married" 11 women still married to other men...and how a lot of these men were likewise sent to the mission field... ...instead of being disgusted by Smith, Brigham Young & Warren Jeffs compiling at least 178 wives between this trio... ...instead of being disgusted by how about 120 years of Mormon "prophets" practicing polygamy leads to the likes of a Warren Jeffs... ...you are disgusted by an "expose'" of sorts on all this.

Colofornian, you're wrong about all of that.
I am disgusted by all those Mormon beliefs and practices. I have often criticised them myself.
I have no problem with the articles you posted, I felt they were honest.

It was your summary of the article that was dishonest.

You said, "“To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon “prophets” yesterday, see: Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition”

The Mormon church believes and argues no such thing about Warren Jeffs. In fact they've done exactly the opposite of what you say they have -- they explicitly criticise and distance themselves from Jeffs and such groups.

You told a lie about the Mormon Church, you knew it was a lie when you wrote it, and anyone with the most cursory understanding of LDS beliefs knows they don't agree with or sanction Warren Jeffs.

You could have been honest and clarified that you were talking about an offshoot splinter of the Mormon church that is less than 1% of all Mormons, as the article you posted did. But you instead chose to mislead.

What would you think of someone calling the Westboro Baptist group the "Christian church", and falsely arguing that the Christian church loves them and thinks what they do is right? That's the same thing you're doing when you call Warren Jeffs and his ilk the "mormon church", when in reality they're the tiniest splinter offshoot of Mormons today.

Criticise beliefs all you want, but don't lie about what people believe, OK? It's disgusting behavior.

You don't have to agree with someone's beliefs to realize that lying about those beliefs is wrong.

What would you think of someone calling the Westboro Baptist group the "Christian church", and falsely arguing that the Christian church loves them and thinks what they do is right? That's the same thing you're doing when you call Warren Jeffs and his ilk the "mormon church", when in reality they're the tiniest splinter offshoot of Mormons today.

Your comparison is poor for at least 2 reasons...

(1) The most important consideration is when you look at the defining characteristic of these false "churches":
For the fLDS, it's polygamy.

And what supposed Mormon "scripture" & doctrine backs that up? (Doctrine & Covenants 132 -- NEVER rescinded or changed or deleted by the mainstream Mormons...it exists like an "old law" still "on the books"...one where the "authorities" promise it will return...Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie says polygamy will return to earth when the mainstream Mormon "jesus" returns...Source: McConkie's book, Mormon Doctrine)

Now compare Phelps' Westboro.

What defining characteristic is there for this group?
For the Phelps, it's picketing.

Is that mainline Christian "Scripture?" (Answer: NO!)

(2) The Phelps are better defined as one extended family -- versus a "church." (That's about all its "church" is made up of).

(3) Besides, what do you do with the Mormon claim that Mormons = "Christians"? Is it OK for mainstream Mormons to draw boundaries between who is "Mormon" and who isn't? But then they frown upon Christians not defining "Mormons" as Christians? (Is that inconsistent?)

Mormons like to have it both ways: They want Mormons to be considered Christians; but don't you dare define who a Mormon is. Now you're playing that game, too. Of defining who is Mormon -- and who isn't.

Lds "prophet" Hinckley once claimed on the Larry King show that there WAS NO SUCH THING as fundamentalist Mormons. In his view, they don't even exist!

Here, I'll take the time to mention Canadian mainstream Mormon FReeper Edward Watson. Not only does Watson deem the fLDS as Mormon, but he also told me in 2008, "Of course, they're Christian..."

So a fundamentalist Mormon-is a Mormon-is a Christian? (Well, I'm not the one who says "no boundaries exist" for the fLDS or other sociologically outlandish groups like Westboro Baptist).

The Mormon church believes and argues no such thing about Warren Jeffs. In fact they've done exactly the opposite of what you say they have -- they explicitly criticise and distance themselves from Jeffs and such groups.

And this is where you & I disagree on the "facts." The fact is that Mormons say one thing -- and then speak out of both sides of their mouths.

Do they criticize & distance themselves from Jeffs & such groups? (Yes)
Yet, simultaneously, do they present ambivalent info about polygamy and its role with future Mormons? (Yes)

To "disavow" means to go vs. the vow. But what did Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie say beginning in 1966? (That the Mormon Jesus would bring back polygamy to Mormons when he returned). That's not disavowing; that, my friend, is an open embrace.

Likewise, mainstream Mormons believe fellow Mormon general authorities -- men who have married more than one wife in a serial fashion -- will become eternal polygamists when they die. (Because they believe marriage is forever). Is that militating vs. polygamy? (Doesn't sound like it)

You told a lie about the Mormon Church, you knew it was a lie when you wrote it, and anyone with the most cursory understanding of LDS beliefs knows they don't agree with or sanction Warren Jeffs.

Let's go back to the content of what I stated...and then I'll provide further context: To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon "prophets" yesterday, see Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition [Real MormonISM].

The article I linked to was a Deseret News article. They are owned by the Mormon church. The journalist tried spinning why Jeffs & fLDS polygamy supposedly has NOTHING to do with its source -- 19th century Mormon polygamy.

Facts:
Lds "prophets" publicly taught polygamy 1852-1890;
but Lds "prophets" also personally practiced or privately taught polygamy from 1831-1910;
Lds polygamous families existing by 1910 were not broken up by Lds leaders -- and some of these unions were still in existence until they died in the early 1960s (source: B. Carmon Hardy, Solemn Covenant appendix)...again, these families were NOT ex-communicated because their union was solemnized by Lds officials!
Finally, ALL of the Lds "prophets" who were prophets up until 1945 were themselves polygamists.

These men were all "role models" for Warren Jeffs. Heroes of "the Mormon faith."

An analogy I could give would be to compare a father and son from the Bible: David and Solomon.
Were both polygamists? (Yes)
Did both sanction polygamy in general? (Yes)
If David had been around by the time Solomon accumulated all those 700 wives & 300 concubines, would he have sanctioned them? (No, I don't think so...just from Deut. 17:17 alone)

In this way, would David have both criticized as well as try to distance himself from the type of polygamy Solomon embraced? (Yes, I believe so)
But does that mean David had no "legacy" role in Solomon continuing polygamy? (No, we cannot conclude that David's polygamy had no impact on how Solomon embraced it...In fact, it's because Solomon's father embraced it that Solomon likewise followed suit)

MA, if you've ever farmed or gardened, you would know that weed residues and weed seeds from previous crops can have a "carryover" effect into soil bank generations.

So just because Solomon took something to an extreme David would never have thought of...
...just because one of the plural unions between David and one of his wifes was annulled (a form of "disavowal" -- see info about his wife/former wife, Michal)...
...doesn't mean a disavowal of polygamy was in any way true of David.

In fact, David and Joseph Smith both took wives who belonged to other men.

Other relevant facts:

* The Mormon church has NEVER rescinded the doctrinal undergirding of polygamy -- found in Doctrines & Covenants 132. It's still on the books, so to speak. And no follow-up revelation critiques it in any way. Likewise, no Lds leader has critiqued past Mormon polygamists; or the past practice of polygamy. They have not said it was "sinful" -- or generated by a false prophesy -- or anything of the like.

* For you to bring up the Westboro family as some sort of parallel would take a situation where...
...19th century Baptists practiced picketing as a way to reach the highest degree of heaven -- per Revelation chapter 23 from that Baptist god...
...only when extreme picketing was cracked down upon by the government, picketing became low-profile for a while...
...and then picketers were forced out of the Baptist church...
...only for the Westboros to emerge...
...citing Rev. 23 that picketing was still promoted by the Baptist god...
...along with other Baptist content from 1966 that the Baptist god would bring back picketing to the church when Jesus returned...

Sorry. None of that works as any kind of parallel. If a "revelation" on picketing was still in the Bible (Revelation 23), that would "hardly" be a disavowal of it by the Baptist God!

You've flunked discernment and basic comparative logic.