Native American DNA
[Post-Mormon Mag.]
Let’s go tubing!
[Palmetto Post-Mor...]
Stampede Get Together!
[Calgary Post-Morm...]
We're going to Camp Quest!
[Switzerland Post-...]
BOSTON Meeting this Sunday at 3pm
[Boston, MA Post-M...]
Why I am a Better Mother
by aworkinprogress
SF Bay Area Monthly Gathering SUNDAY (5/4)
exmoinaz
SF Bay Area Monthly Gathering SUNDAY (5/4)
owned
The Mormon Mask
by Born Free
Las Vegas Meetup--Jazz in the Park Saturday May 10 6:30PM
onendagus
Resignation Letter to My Family
ShadowSage
Resignation Letter to My Family
ShadowSage
Guru Busters
by Flora4
Guru Busters
by Flora4
Resignation Letter to My Family
Hbush1987
General Non-Conference: Palmetto State Session
Swearing Elder
Sunday Morning Hangout at Container Park March 30th
onendagus
Second Wednesdays
Houston
General Non-Conference: Palmetto State Session
Swearing Elder
General Non-Conference: Palmetto State Session
dovahkiyn
February Meetup Sunday the 16th 2:00pm Grand Cafe at Sunset Station
onendagus
Visitors welcome !
priorvej12
Las Vegas meetup Sun Jan 12th 1pm at Milos in Boulder City
onendagus
January 5th- Southern Utah PostMormon Lecture Series
gypsyrose
Book of Mormon Tories
by Tom Donofrio
Book of Mormon Tories
by Nogginus Skepticalus
Native American DNA
by GTM
Ongoing Monthly Gatherings!
Reuben
Ongoing Monthly Gatherings!
Virginia Steve
CALM meet up for June
4bagel
  It gets better! Resources to help with coping
  House Rules for posting on this website
  Why is there sometimes anger here?
  Glossary of Post-Mormon Terms
  Frequently Asked Questions
 
   
 
The Lamanite Issue is Not So Much a Matter of Doctrine as it is a Matter of Credibility
 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

Prosecutor:  Tell me, Mr. Hinckley...

 

Hinckley: PresidentHinckley...

 

Prosecutor: Ok then, President Hinckley, does the Church now believe that Joseph Smith could translate Egyptian Hieroglyphics, as evidenced by the Book of Abraham, and that the Book of Abraham was in fact signed by Abraham?

 

Hinckley: No, I don't think we teach that. 

 

Prosecutor:  So the Church has distanced itself from this teaching of Joseph Smith, that the Book of Abraham is the literal translation of a book of scripture written by and signed by the ancient patriarch, Abraham?

 

Hinckley:  We believe that Smith was inspired to write the book.

 

Prosecutor:  But Smith himself said it was a literal translation of a book written by Abraham himself?

 

Hinckley:  We think he misspoke.

 

Prosecutor:  So Smith was wrong?

 

Hinckley: Well, I wouldn't sa...

 

Prosecutor:  Does the church now believe that if a man fails to practice the principal of plural marriage, that he is damned, as stated in your Doctrine & Covenants Section 132 verse 4?

 

Hinckley:  I don't think we teach that.

 

Prosecutor:  Would you say that Joseph Smith produced the Doctrine and Covenants by revelation?

 

Hinckley:  Yes.  I know that he did.

 

Prosecutor: And if the scriptures are produced by revelation, and they are clear in their condemnation of "all who receive this law but do not live it," then are you not yourself, sir, condemned to the Terrestrial Kingdom?

 

Hinckley:  We no longer teach that.

 

Prosecutor:  Yet Smith produced that scripture by direct revelation?

 

Hinckley:  We believe so.

 

Prosecutor:  So God didn't mean what he said?

 

Hinckley:  That is absurd!

 

Prosecutor:  Then Smith got it wrong?

 

Hinckley:  Well...

 

Prosecutor:  Does the church practice the law of consecration as taught by Joseph Smith?

 

Hinckley:  We consecrate 10% of our increase to the building of the kingdom.

 

Prosecutor:  You're evading the question.  Joseph Smith taught that all your possessions should be consecrated to the Church, and divided equally among all according to their need.  I believe he called that "The United Order."  Do you live that law?

 

Hinckley:  No.

 

Prosecutor:  So Smith was wrong?

 

Hinckley:  Well I...

 

Prosecutor:  So this week we learned that the Church has changed its position on the Lamanites being the "principal ancestors" of the Native Americans, stating instead that the Lamanites were "among the ancestors" of the Native Americans, is that correct?

 

Hinckley:  That is correct.

 

Prosecutor:  And why did you make this change?

 

Hinckley:  The pedigree of the Native Americans is not an issue that is pertinent to the salvation of mankind.  This change merely represents our growing understanding of the complexity of the issue, and the apparent fact that the Lamanites and Nephites were a small faction of the population of the Americas.

 

Prosecutor:  But Joseph Smith himself taught that the Book of Mormon was written for the American Indian, to bring them to a knowledge of their forefathers.  He taught on multiple occasions, documented in his teachings, and captured in many verses of the Doctrine & Covenants that Lamanite=American Indian.  He went so far as to refer to the aboriginal people as "Jews." 

 

Hinckley:  We believe he he didn't appreciate the full complexity of the issue.

 

Prosecutor:  So Smith was wrong?

 

Hinckley: Well, I...

 

Prosecutor:  So what I have heard today is that the modern church is convinced that with regard to Smith's revelations on the Book of Abraham, the practice of plural marriage, the United Order, and the ancestry of the Lamanites, all of which Smith claimed to have received by the gift of revelation during the restoration of the gospel, that he was "wrong."  That despite the strength of the testimony of your founding prophet on each of these issues, whom you revere as the chosen one, the elect, the mouthpiece of God for this dispensation, that none of these teachings apparently  work for the church, and therefore must not be true.  And yet, despite all this evidence that Joseph Smith was making this all up as he went, you continue to believe that he was a prophet of God, and not some con-man working up a brilliant scheme to bilk his followers of their money, adoration, and young women?

 

Hinckley:  That's correct.

 

Prosecutor:  Your honor, I believe this man is not fit to stand as a witness.  He has abandoned reason, and leads his people to do likewise.  I rest my case.

 

 

 

The bottom line here is, how long can the Mormons stretch the credibility of Joseph Smith?  At what point does the modern church turn around and realize that they no longer teach what he taught?  And if they don't teach what he taught, then upon WHAT are they built?

 

The foolish man builds his house upon the sand.  Joseph Smith is a beach.

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-05-29

peter_mary:

 

The bottom line here is, how long can the Mormons stretch the credibility of Joseph Smith?  At what point does the modern church turn around and realize that they no longer teach what he taught?  And if they don't teach what he taught, then upon WHAT are they built?

 

The foolish man builds his house upon the sand.  Joseph Smith is a beach.

 

 

good point peter mary.

 Signature 

MY BLOG: http://www.thisisjohns.blogspot.com

 
Member
RankRankRank
Joined  2007-11-03

Exactly! It's a matter a credibility. And honesty. And forthcoming-ness, if that;s a word. Mormons are being lied to and they have nothing to back it up with except for their tingly spiritual affirmations.
 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-04-15

Damn dude, that was powerful. Well written.
 Signature 

“The river of truth is always splitting up into arms that reunite. Islanded between them, the inhabitants argue for a lifetime as to which is the mainstream”

Cyril Connolly

 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-06-05

Very well done! Thank you.
 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-13

This one goes into the best of Peter-Mary.  I just want to go on record that I KNEW HIM WHEN.     Always remember the little people P-M when you are rich and famous.

 

 

 

ft

 Signature 

It is one’s willingness to become uncomfortable and face the fear that what we might uncover could rock the foundations of our world that will allow us to escape the bonds of Mormonism.

INTROSPECT

 
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2005-01-23

peter_mary, though we read, studied, prayed, fasted, and attended most of our meetings we could not keep up with the "truth."  We got left behind.  We failed to understand the great simplicity of the only Mormon doctrine: Follow the living prophet.  That's it-that is the real bottom line in Mormon reality.
 Signature 
 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-08-24

and all this time I thought it was "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU"
 Signature 

so if you wanna burn yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna cut yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna kill yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
call me up before your dead, we can make some plans instead
send me an IM, i’ll be your friend
Loose Lips By Kimya Dawson

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-06-03

PM,  That is brilliant !  I've never thougth of it along those lines before, but I think you've nail it.
 Signature 

“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.”
-Benjamin Franklin

 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-11-05

I love your posts P_M.  Thank you! 
 Signature 

~CrazyDaisy~


”...you’re going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.”

 
Avatar
Member
RankRankRank
Joined  2007-05-24

Great post!  You sum it all up beautifully.  I just got done reading through comments on the SL Trib page and the most disturbing thing to me was mormon inability to see this point.  It may be one word in the intro, but it directly pertains to the whole big picture of the Book of Mormon.  And its undeniable that there is a long held belief that lamanites=native americans.  Period. 

What also peeves me is how quietly they did it!  Or.....tried to do it!

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

It is becoming abundantly clear to me that Church is willing to distance itself from the direct teachings of Joseph Smith, and yet they continue to elevate him ever closer to the position of virtual god-hood.  But I don't understand how you can logically, reasonably, or rationally have it both ways.

 

If we can't believe Smith when he says that the Book of Mormon's principal antagonists, the Lamanites, are "Jews" and the ancestors of today's American Indians, then can we believe him when he tells us an Angel revealed this book to him?

 

Witnesses lose credibility when they start crossing themselves.

 

For example, David Whitmer went on the record, with regard to Joseph's polygamy, that "if you believed me then [when I bore witness to the Book of Mormon plates], you must believe me now."  This was said in the context of Joseph Smith being a fallen prophet.  So who do we believe?  The David Whitmer that says Joseph Smith is a prophet who reveals the word of God, or the David Whitmer that says Joseph Smith is no longer a prophet?  The church made a choice (clearly), but is it rational?

 

Answer:  No.

 

Martin Harris bore witness that he "saw" the plates of Moroni.  But he also bore witness that he walked and talked with Jesus Christ on the banks of the Susquehana River (if I recall correctly), as Jesus appeared to him in the form of a deer.  So who do we believe?  The Martin Harris who says that Joseph Smith was a prophet, or the Martin Harris who claims that Jesus Christ is a shape-shifter appearing like a hooved herbivore?

 

Brigham Young bore witness for years that Joseph Smith was what he said he was, and then he went on to declare that if you believed him on that, then you must believe him when he tells us that Adam is non other than God.  So who do we believe, the Brigham Young who testifies of Joseph Smith, or the Brigham Young who testifies of Adam?

 

Emma Smith claimed to have handled the gold plates under a "cloth", and that they "rustled like tin" (or something like that).  She also denied to her dying days to her sons that their father never practiced nor condoned the practice of polygamy.  So who do we believe?  The Emma Smith who testifies to the legitimacy of Joseph's prophecies, or the Emma Smith who denies them outright?

 

 

What Mormons don't know--because they aren't told--is that their witnesses aren't credible.  They are only told the parts of their testimonies that sustain the current platform that the church chooses to construct, and they simply white-wash the rest.  The current Lamanite issue is just the latest, and the most brazen attempt to alter the fundamental paradigm of Mormonism since the Manifesto by Wilford Woodruff undoing polygamy. 

 

The foundation of Mormonism has no credibility, and THAT, my friends, is the story that must be told.

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-11-01

The foundation of Mormonism has no credibility...

 

Unless there are some incredibly 180 degree 'revelations' to sweep it all away!

 

 

 Signature 

opisjvom[gfb sk

 
Member
RankRankRank
Joined  2007-11-03

Peter mary you are so right on here. What comes to my mind is how mormons are so busy and single minded in purpose that the whole DARK AGES doctrine causes them to have an unrealistic view of all history. They divide all existance into before JS's revelation and after, and just won't ever trust that any witnesses or documentation from the 1800's could possibly be credible, EVEN kooky old-timey doctrine set out by the prophets themselves! kwim? They act like 1830 was an ancient time and can therefore be explained away!
 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

becreyn:
They act like 1830 was an ancient time and can therefore be explained away!

That's the power of myth-making.  The further removed you are from the actual event, the less likely anyone is to require the same degree of reason be applied to it as we would demand of a current event.  If Joseph Smith were to arrive on the scene today and declare that he had received golden plates, we would be incredulous.  But we are very open minded about that possibility if it happened 150 years.  Well, we WERE open minded...

 

Imagine how open minded we would be to things 2000 years later?  If you heard on the news today that a young woman in the Bronx claimed that she was a virgin, but had a baby nontheless, how likely are you to believe her?  If you heard that a Baptist preacher claimed to have turned water into wine, would you believe him?

 

It is not at all my intent to derail this thread or turn the attention off the current topic.  My only point is simply to amplify yours, becreyn, that the further we are removed from the actual event, the less reasonableness we demand of the event.

 

We are watching the myth-making unfold right before our eyes.  The church is moving away from history, and into the realm of myth.  In some ways, that actually strengthens their position as a "religion"--myths are powerful teaching tools without requiring factual accuracy.  The problem is, if the church overtly adopts that paradigm with regard to Smith, his books and his revelations, then they run the risk of undermining the credibility of the whole damn charade.  Their strategy, I suspect, is to gently guide the evolution of the prevailing paradigm, so that the proverbial frog does not know it has been boiled to death until the lights go out.

 

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-04-15

peter_mary:

That's the power of myth-making.  The further removed you are from the actual event, the less likely anyone is to require the same degree of reason be applied to it as we would demand of a current event.  If Joseph Smith were to arrive on the scene today and declare that he had received golden plates, we would be incredulous.  But we are very open minded about that possibility if it happened 150 years.  Well, we WERE open minded...

 

 

 

     Exactly, just look at Warren Jeffs, he would have fit in just fine with Joseph and the gang. But in 2007 people get locked up for trying to pull that $hit. I wonder if Jeffs being in prison scares Hinckley and the other G.A.s at all. G.As thinking to themselves: "Oh crap, calling ourselves a religon doesn't mean we can do whatever the hell we want without having to face the law... anymore".

 Signature 

“The river of truth is always splitting up into arms that reunite. Islanded between them, the inhabitants argue for a lifetime as to which is the mainstream”

Cyril Connolly

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-13

peter_mary:
becreyn:
They act like 1830 was an ancient time and can therefore be explained away!

That's the power of myth-making.  The further removed you are from the actual event, the less likely anyone is to require the same degree of reason be applied to it as we would demand of a current event.  If Joseph Smith were to arrive on the scene today and declare that he had received golden plates, we would be incredulous.  But we are very open minded about that possibility if it happened 150 years.  Well, we WERE open minded...

 

 

 

 

 

I think Eber D Howe wrote "Mormonism  Unvailed" in 1833 or thereabouts. This guy was calling BS as Smith was moving the Church to Kirtland. If I remember correctly Howe had compiled at least 50 affadavits of individuals in the Palmyra area that painted Smith as an utter charlatan and naer-do-well. 

 

 

It can take a long time for the truth to finally come to bear. Sometimes it can even take a century or two. The major disadvantage Mormonism faces is being birthed in the modern era. Now in the post-modern era the science, and free flow of information,  is disemboweling the cannon of the Church.  

 

 

The verdict is still out. Will they be able to make the transition to myth? Guess we'll see eh? If nothing else it will be interesting to watch.

 

Ft pulls up chair with hot buttered popcorn.

 

 

ft

 Signature 

It is one’s willingness to become uncomfortable and face the fear that what we might uncover could rock the foundations of our world that will allow us to escape the bonds of Mormonism.

INTROSPECT

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

free thinker:

 

The verdict is still out. Will they be able to make the transition to myth? Guess we'll see eh? If nothing else it will be interesting to watch.

 

Ft pulls up chair with hot buttered popcorn.

 

 

ft

I agree.  I think we're watching the myth-making, and it's fascinating.  I also happen to believe that as you and I...

 

::Peter_Mary pulls up chair next to FT::

 

...sit and watch, we'll see ever increasing numbers of people get pushed out of the church BY the church.  Not by means of discipline, but by means of undermining their faith. 

 

If the church survives the transition to a myth-based church teaching good principles, and distances themselves from a history-based church teaching true principles, then it might persist into the next millenium--and in a much more inocuous form.  However, if it insists on being history-based/truth teaching and stumbles over these myth-transition incidents, then....well, who knows, but I am incined to think that a schism will occur, leaving only the most zealously fundamental and utterly clueless left to receive the sacrament on Sunday morning.

 

::Peter_Mary helps himself to FT's popcorn::

 

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-04-12

The church will endure in the everlasting hills...

 

I found this in the Provo Daily Herald comments:  <sigh>

 

 

"I am thinking specifically of our common fathers Noah 4400 years ago and Adam 6000 years ago.  I'm no expert on the evidence, but as I recall, it shows no such thing.  Of course, we believers assume there is a scientific explanation.  I assume God can do whatever He wants with DNA.  But to say the evidence applies to the the BofM and not the Bible?  The BofM has always claimed some physical changes were brought upon the Lamanites which would have to be a change in the DNA."

 Signature 

-The Pirate...(arriving 200 years too late…)

...I’m not the first, won’t be the last.  Lust for the future, treasure the past… proud.jpg

“Make sure that your moral compass is set due ‘the right thing’.”  -Emerson Cod

This post has been reviewed for it’s content, and has been found to comply with the general concept of the mission of this website and it’s management.  Approved for submission by member #1087.

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-08-24

Not to be overly skeptical and rain on everybodies parade here,  But when has the church ever worried about credibility among its members.  They have a captive audience who will tear down all the signs and posters and gladlly believe that we are at war with eastasia and have always been at war with eastasia. 
 Signature 

so if you wanna burn yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna cut yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna kill yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
call me up before your dead, we can make some plans instead
send me an IM, i’ll be your friend
Loose Lips By Kimya Dawson

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-07-25

 "I assume God can do whatever He wants with DNA."

 

Idiots spouting nonsense makes my brain hurt.

How I loathe the Provo Daily Herald.

Even when I lived in Crappy Valley I couldn't stand that paper. 

 Signature 

“Faith is what you have in things that don’t exist.”
-Homer Simpson

http://postmormonsongs.blogspot.com/
http://purplegoat80.blogspot.com/

 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-10-02

"sit and watch, we'll see ever increasing numbers of people get pushed out of the church BY the church.  Not by means of discipline, but by means of undermining their faith. "

 

I was listening to the Paul Toscano podcasts at Mormon Stories the other day and at one point John Dehlin says to him something to the effect of "don't you think your speeches had the potential to destroy people's faith and testimonies?"  And Toscano said he would put his body count on testimonies destroyed against Boyd Packer's any day of the week.  I loved that response because it is so demonstrably true.  The church excommunicates folks like Toscano and Lyndon Lamborn because of the phantom danger that they are going to act like Pied Pipers and lead people out of the church.  But so many more people have left because of Gordon Hinckley and Boyd Packer and the rest than have ever left because of any lay member critic.  By orders of magnitude.  Oh, the irony! 

 Signature 

“We have always been taught that when the brethren were in a tight place that it would not be amiss to lie to help them out.”—LDS Apostle Mathias Cowley.

www.equalitysblog.typepad.com

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

epic:
Not to be overly skeptical and rain on everybodies parade here,  But when has the church ever worried about credibility among its members.  They have a captive audience who will tear down all the signs and posters and gladlly believe that we are at war with eastasia and have always been at war with eastasia. 

Actually, that's a part of the message here, ironically--the church SHOULD worry about credibility among its members, because it's going to become increasingly important.

 

Here's how I see it.  Think of the great body of church members gathered together in a circle.  At the center of the circle are the members who--no matter what--are always going to be forever and ever true believing Mormons.  They're the "A-Teamers".  The "First String."  As you move toward the edge of the circle, you find your "B-Teamers", who, although faithful, are not turbo/psycho faithful.  As you keep moving toward the edge, you find people who are questioning more and more, until right AT the edge are the people who are teetering on leaving the church altogether. 

 

Each time the credibility shrinks, so does the circle--and the people on the edge fall off.  Each time the leadership cranks up the standards a notch, the circle shrinks again--and more people fall off. 

 

That's bad business. 

 

And the church knows that.

 

So they are actually trying to counter that action by moderating the history of the church and the teachings of its earliest prophets.  They are hoping that by addressing the DNA issue and making the problem go away, that they are actually going to push that circle wider, and keep the people on the edge safely inside, and perhaps even encompass again some people who left, but not by much.

 

That's EXACTLY what happened when they gave black men the priesthood.  That's also exactly what happened when they abolished polygamy.  It pushed the circle wider--for a while.  But they keep finding ways to ratchet it back down, and the credibility continues to shring the circle with each scientific finding...or in the case of Zarahemla, the LACK of scientific finding.

 

The church is happy to keep it's core intact--they pay tithing.  The people on the edge don't.  The people on the edge are not teaching their children very well, not serving honorable missions, not marrying in the temple, and not really contributing to the growth of the kingdom.  It's a calculated risk that they're willing to take, hoping that, while they may bump a few fence-sitters out of the circle, they might make themselves more palatable to the people who are just outside the circle, looking in.

 

It's part of the mainstreaming.  It's part of cleaning up the house so it's more inviting to the buyers.  They have a message to sell, and they are banking on the theory that by cleaning up this mess, more people will buy it.

 

And that's why we have to keep pushing this message. 

 

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-04-26

Amen P_M!!

 

You put it so well. Thank you!

 Signature 

~HILLARIE~

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

 
Avatar
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-10-02

P-M, I like your circle analogy. I wonder what it says about the church that it is losing people not only on the edge but as the cirle shrinks, some of the zealots in the very center.  I was one of those true-blue believers in the center, and now I'm a rabble-rouser.  The church isn't just losing the slackers; it's losing Bishops and Relief Society Presidents and temple-goers, full tithe-payers, returned missionaries, etc. 
 Signature 

“We have always been taught that when the brethren were in a tight place that it would not be amiss to lie to help them out.”—LDS Apostle Mathias Cowley.

www.equalitysblog.typepad.com

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-08-24

peter_mary:
epic:
Not to be overly skeptical and rain on everybodies parade here,  But when has the church ever worried about credibility among its members.  They have a captive audience who will tear down all the signs and posters and gladlly believe that we are at war with eastasia and have always been at war with eastasia. 

Actually, that's a part of the message here, ironically--the church SHOULD worry about credibility among its members, because it's going to become increasingly important.

 

Here's how I see it.  Think of the great body of church members gathered together in a circle.  At the center of the circle are the members who--no matter what--are always going to be forever and ever true believing Mormons.  They're the "A-Teamers".  The "First String."  As you move toward the edge of the circle, you find your "B-Teamers", who, although faithful, are not turbo/psycho faithful.  As you keep moving toward the edge, you find people who are questioning more and more, until right AT the edge are the people who are teetering on leaving the church altogether. 

 

Each time the credibility shrinks, so does the circle--and the people on the edge fall off.  Each time the leadership cranks up the standards a notch, the circle shrinks again--and more people fall off. 

 

That's bad business. 

 

And the church knows that.

 

So they are actually trying to counter that action by moderating the history of the church and the teachings of its earliest prophets.  They are hoping that by addressing the DNA issue and making the problem go away, that they are actually going to push that circle wider, and keep the people on the edge safely inside, and perhaps even encompass again some people who left, but not by much.

 

That's EXACTLY what happened when they gave black men the priesthood.  That's also exactly what happened when they abolished polygamy.  It pushed the circle wider--for a while.  But they keep finding ways to ratchet it back down, and the credibility continues to shring the circle with each scientific finding...or in the case of Zarahemla, the LACK of scientific finding.

 

The church is happy to keep it's core intact--they pay tithing.  The people on the edge don't.  The people on the edge are not teaching their children very well, not serving honorable missions, not marrying in the temple, and not really contributing to the growth of the kingdom.  It's a calculated risk that they're willing to take, hoping that, while they may bump a few fence-sitters out of the circle, they might make themselves more palatable to the people who are just outside the circle, looking in.

 

It's part of the mainstreaming.  It's part of cleaning up the house so it's more inviting to the buyers.  They have a message to sell, and they are banking on the theory that by cleaning up this mess, more people will buy it.

 

And that's why we have to keep pushing this message. 

 

 

I don't disagree with you.  I am just not as optimistic about the outcome.  OR maybe I am hoping for a complete downfall rather than a slow mainstreaming towards other christian beliefs. 

 

Actually I am not sure what I am hoping for.  to tell the truth I am still reeling from having my entire belief system blow up in front of me!! 

 

Thank you for your comments they really help me think things out. 

 Signature 

so if you wanna burn yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna cut yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
and if you wanna kill yourself remember that I LOVE YOU
call me up before your dead, we can make some plans instead
send me an IM, i’ll be your friend
Loose Lips By Kimya Dawson

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2004-12-15

epic:

I don't disagree with you.  I am just not as optimistic about the outcome. 

Epic, dude...Perhaps my enthusiasm for the issue belies my expectations.  I don't anticipate much will come of this, either.  In the same way that the members were told to yawn through the loss of polygamy, a shift in the millenialistic expectations, and the blacks with the priesthood, most people will yawn through this, too.

 

But it is kinda fun to feel like you have the church on the defensive, scrambling to figure out how to get out of this one!  Every once in a while, David has Goliath wincing, and feeling the bump on his noggin...

 

 

Even if we are successful in getting the word out, the result for 95% of the church membership will be retrenchment, and the perpetuation of the persecution complex under which they so dutifully labor...

 

 

 

 Signature 

smiley23.gif border=0
Doing stupid things faster and with more energy since 1962.

 
Avatar
Long Timer
RankRankRankRankRank
Joined  2007-11-01

I really like that circle analogy, too. I'd like to think that I made it out alive, and with time to spare!

 Signature 

opisjvom[gfb sk

 
       
 


Our next project
will be announced soon.

Tax exempt status.
Celestial Wedgie
Elder OldDog
Heretic
Matter Unorganized
Quartersawn
Sossy
SoulSherlock
Swearing Elder
Troubled Wife
WestBerkeleyFlats

Logged in: 10
Not logged in: 68
Logged in anonymous: 0
(Joined in last 24 hours)
 
TiredMom
Whatsnext
jamesone5
blueyes
HintofLimeTostitos

Total members: 9616
Mellowed
by lunaverse
Why?
by Celestial Wedgie
LDS and Virginia connection?
by OnTheRiverBank
Its a Start
by Jon Marshall
Chat w/TBM New Neighbor
by Morgbot Not
The "Program" of the Lord
by Old Kinderhooker