Marlin K Jensen: Large numbers NOT apostatizing

[_Drifting]

The difficulty the Church faces is that it isn't in tune with the needs of its members.
Instead the Church tries to change the needs of its members so they fall into line with what the Church is trying to sell.

Your statement here calls into question your understanding of not only organized religion, but religion itself.

Please explain how your post relates to my post.

[_Drifting]

What is out of touch with Christ is thinking that His teachings are malleable to the whims of society, that they are supposed to formed by the temporal, as you state above, "needs of its members"...this is simply not the case. The beauty and power of the Gospel is that it immutable, that it is beyond the abilities of mere men to corrupt...a corruption you seemingly would relish.

The two biggest changes the Church has made since its inception have been to reverse the doctrines of polygamy and banning blacks from the Priesthood. These two changes were made because of pressure from society, not from God. They were reactive not proactive. Christs teachings were malleable to the whims of society.

Once again you fail.

[_subgenius]

....These two changes were made because of pressure from society, not from God. They were reactive not proactive.....

please, prove this...or at best, please provide sufficient evidence which supports a reasonable conclusion that "pressure from society" was, in fact, the cause.
once again, we see your assumptions cloaked as fact.
I can understand why you would think i "fail" - so much fail is dripping for your pores that the stench must surely permeate your very vision of the world around you.

[_Buffalo]

....These two changes were made because of pressure from society, not from God. They were reactive not proactive.....

please, prove this...or at best, please provide sufficient evidence which supports a reasonable conclusion that "pressure from society" was, in fact, the cause.
once again, we see your assumptions cloaked as fact.
I can understand why you would think i "fail" - so much fail is dripping for your pores that the stench must surely permeate your very vision of the world around you.

The fact that leadership continued to practice polygamy in secret after the first "ban" is a big clue. That it was only put into place after a great deal of legal pressure is another.

The fact that BYU and the church were under enormous pressure to drop the priesthood ban is a third. But go on, tell us how they're not reactive.

[_Drifting]

....These two changes were made because of pressure from society, not from God. They were reactive not proactive.....

please, prove this...or at best, please provide sufficient evidence which supports a reasonable conclusion that "pressure from society" was, in fact, the cause.
once again, we see your assumptions cloaked as fact.
I can understand why you would think i "fail" - so much fail is dripping for your pores that the stench must surely permeate your very vision of the world around you.

You think these two reversals were God being proactive?

Polygamy ended because it was unacceptable to society and the Church was avoiding loss of worldly goods and avoiding jail time for its polygamous leadership.

The Priesthood ban ended 10 years after MLK gave his life helping to change societies view that a black skin was a sign of inferiority (I note that the Church canon still states that a black skin signifies unrighteousness) and after sports teams refused to compete against the all white BYU teams.

The Church arrives late to the party and then forgets to bring a bottle...

[_Tobin]

The church isn't just a group of people meeting together. It's a large corporation with a lot of assets. That's what will suffer if tithing decreases.

And this is a bad thing how?

[_Runtu]

And this is a bad thing how?

It's not a bad thing for me, but I'm sure all those folks whose livelihoods depend on the growth of the institution don't share my opinion.

[_Equality]

....These two changes were made because of pressure from society, not from God. They were reactive not proactive.....

please, prove this...or at best, please provide sufficient evidence which supports a reasonable conclusion that "pressure from society" was, in fact, the cause.
once again, we see your assumptions cloaked as fact.
I can understand why you would think i "fail" - so much fail is dripping for your pores that the stench must surely permeate your very vision of the world around you.

Although Woodruff claimed it was a revelation from God that caused the public abandonment of polygamy, even he acknowledged that the revelation came about because of societal pressure. The revelation he described was what the Lord showed him would happen if they kept up the practice--society would put an end to it and God would not stop society from putting an end to it. So it was either abandon it pre-emptively before the government confiscated all Mormon property, including the temples, or wait until society forced it on them. There is no indication in anything the church has published about the end of polygamy that the church would have abandoned the Principle but for the massive societal opposition to the practice. Here is what Woddruff said, in a talk that is canonized LDS scripture:

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

subgenious, are you seriously going to argue that the abandonment of polygamy by the church was not done in reaction (and thus, was "reactive") to societal pressure?

[_bcspace]

Although Woodruff claimed it was a revelation from God that caused the public abandonment of polygamy, even he acknowledged that the revelation came about because of societal pressure.

Nothing wrong with that. Joseph Smith himself came to the First Vision as result of societal pressure. But some people are under the mistaken impression that any doctrine can be changed via such pressure. The ones in question typically are morality issues or higher law issues or missed the mark on social pressure and in none of those cases did the doctrine actually change.

[_Drifting]

Although Woodruff claimed it was a revelation from God that caused the public abandonment of polygamy, even he acknowledged that the revelation came about because of societal pressure.

Nothing wrong with that. Joseph Smith himself came to the First Vision as result of societal pressure. But some people are under the mistaken impression that any doctrine can be changed via such pressure. The ones in question typically are morality issues or higher law issues or missed the mark on social pressure and in none of those cases did the doctrine actually change.

bcspace still believes Polygamy is doctrinal despite Hinckley saying he believed it wasn't doctrinal. bcspace gets around this by saying that what Hinckley meant was, it's not doctrinal at the current time. But it was live doctrine before and it could be live doctrine again, it just isn't live doctrine right now.

bcspace also still believes that a black skin is the sign of the curse God places on unrighteous people. To be fair to bcspace, this belief is supported by Mormon scripture.