Why? Why must statements about an everlasting hell be re-interpreted by Smith's later words?
If FastCoyote starts having some of his revelatory visions again of the same "nature" he had last year...
...& he pulls a "Joseph Smith" on us & redefines "eternal" or "everlasting" the way Joseph did...as "temporary" and the exact opposite of endless
...only, mind you, instead of applying it to hell like Smith...FastCoyote applied this new definition to heaven...
...would we all mindlessly say, "Well, I guess all those passages in the Bible & Book of Mormon about eternal, everlasting heaven need to be filtered through FastCoyote II, chapter 19, verses 4-12" ???
In just one fell swoop, Smith contradicted every Biblical writer, prophet, apostle who used that word not to mention every dictionary & every etymologist treatment of that word. All by Joseph Smith edict. On one side of the balance is God's people for thousands of years, reinforced by the vocabulary & rules of being able to communicate in a straightforward way...on the other side was a 25-year-old man who objected to hell being eternal...and decided then & there to redefine the term "endless."
May I suggest all Mormons reading this do their own Bible & BoM study on how often heaven & hell are mentioned in a chapter where either eternal or everlasting is used to describe both places.
Just think about all the folks the past 175 yrs who've been encouraged to read & pray about the BoM minus a handy D&C available. Was there any sain reason for them to take the words "eternal," "everlasting" or "endless" at their face value in describing the beyond?
Most of them read thru it thinking, "This sounds like the Bible." Little did they realize that Smith at times used Doctrine & Covenants like a "decoder ring" where you take a fine biblical word like eternal or everlasting or endless and twist it into meaning exactly its opposite.
[If FastCoyote starts having some of his revelatory visions again of the same “nature” he had last year...
...& he pulls a “Joseph Smith” on us & redefines “eternal” or “everlasting” the way Joseph did...as “temporary” and the exact opposite of endless
...only, mind you, instead of applying it to hell like Smith...FastCoyote applied this new definition to heaven...
...would we all mindlessly say, “Well, I guess all those passages in the Bible & Book of Mormon about eternal, everlasting heaven need to be filtered through FastCoyote II, chapter 19, verses 4-12” ??? ]
Trust me, the visions have been tingling and beckoning most perversely.
Here’s the thing, the only way to break the back of politically correct censorship is to claim the privilege for oneself.
festus was, for example, quite prescient in his call for Muslim Freepers to join in a “no-bashing-allowed” thread.
I also tried to point out in a thread whose main article stated that the author would describe Temple ceremonies, but only to the point of where holy secrecy begins, that that opens a door big enough for a Mack truck. If I postulate a “secret Temple Bunny Hop Ritual”, who is to prove me wrong? Those who tried would either be unknowing Gentiles, or True Believers who had just broken the secrecy of the inner sanctum and thus could not be believed.
Hence I postulate that censorship and “no-bashing” rules can only lead to the most grim parody of the “protected” faith. Where logic is held in poor esteem, only the insane may wander.
Indeed, by claiming I have Smithian Powers and am a God In Embryo (which I am by the way), it immediately inoculates me (in the present milieu) from all the inevitably nasty remarks against the Religion of Fast Coyoteism. This is a point of logic obvious to any but the most dense.
For Example, I now swear never to reveal under pain of utter damnation the most high secret of the holey garments of Fast Coyoteism, which are rumored to be a pair of Speedos with color coordinated pink tank top. If this rumor were true, I would be divulging a religious secret, making me guilty of bashing my own religion (perhaps I can be banned for revealing religious secrets of my own religion?).
Silly Wabbit!
The same weason that EVERLASTING Covenant of POLYGAMY was re-interpreted by Wilford and Snow!