DiscussMormonism.com

I witnessed an address by a Mission President to a group of young men and their Fathers. His talk was geared towards encouraging the young men to serve missions.

At one point in his discourse he promised the young men that if they served missions they would be able to get more choice wives and have better children. Those were his exact phrases.

I don't believe he had thought his words through.

A portion of the audience were young men who's Fathers hadn't served missions - he had just told them that they weren't as good as the kids their Father could have had.

A portion of the audience were Fathers who hadn't served missions - he had just told them their wives weren't as choice as the ones they could have married.

My question - is this the Church's position, or just his inspired position?

Here's the flowchart:

Is it embarrassing to the church? Y - Speaking as a man
N - Inspired doctrine, unless some point in the future it becomes embarassing, in which case - Speaking as a man

My bishop told my brother that he would get a beautiful wife by serving a mission.

When he left his mission (early) his MP told him he would have a horrible life and an undesirable wife.

So, yeah, this does appear to be a belief of the church and some of its members. I was dumbfounded when I heard it because of the implications you mention. It is a very stupid teaching.

It seems that there are always 'worldly' blessings attached to serving the Lord in Mormon culture. Heaven forbid that in following Jesus one actually gets a cross and privation rather than a beautiful family, successful career, and a large suburban house with 2 SUVs.

I think this type of thinking and attitude is found in the Church. Of course its found in many churches. But I can't stand this type of thinking. I find it troubling.

stemelbow wrote:I think this type of thinking and attitude is found in the Church. Of course its found in many churches. But I can't stand this type of thinking. I find it troubling.

I agree with you Stem.
I just don't know if this is isolated human failing or institutionalised policy.

Buffalo wrote:Here's the flowchart:

Is it embarrassing to the church? Y - Speaking as a man
N - Inspired doctrine, unless some point in the future it becomes embarassing, in which case - Speaking as a man

you forgot third option:
Is it an exaggerated or fabricated anecdote put forth by an atheist or bitter former member or self-doubting critic? Y - then thread is bait.
i do not believe a word of the story in OP.

subgenius wrote:i do not believe a word of the story in OP.

and that's important because....


Sadly sub, if anything, I've underplayed what he actually said.

jon wrote:

subgenius wrote:i do not believe a word of the story in OP.

and that's important because....

well i have recently discovered that factual and verifiable events are of the utmost importance in establishing the credibility of any "story".
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=20563

Sadly sub, if anything, I've underplayed what he actually said.

in light of the above mentioned thread you must be able to offer evidence/proof that what you say is true and actual and verifiable....or else you may be a "liar.
There is more reason to believe you fabricated the OP than not.

i can wait for the proof of what you say in the OP.....then....we can legitimately discuss your "point".
(just wait until you re-tell that story in 40 years, no telling what you will say)

jon wrote:At one point in his discourse he promised the young men that if they served missions they would be able to get more choice wives and have better children. Those were his exact phrases.

Probably good advice If you want a wife that has S*** for brains.