Mormon Wealth: A Matter of Money

[NRnowlinMA]

The Holy Spirit might confirm the fact that John Wilkes Booth assassinated Abraham Lincoln, but you don't have to believe it. The secular facts about Mormonism that I have stated in my posts are, and have been, established as truthful secular facts. The facts supporting the existence and practice of fertility rites are as much true facts as the facts supporting that Gordon B. Hinckley lied to the FBI about his close personal and business relationship with convicted 1985 bomber Mark Hoffman. They are as much true facts as the facts supporting the conspiracy of Brigham Young and his cohorts in the planning and execution of the Mountain Meadows massacre. They say that where there is copious smoke, there is usually a fire burning. People like Mormon apostle Boyd K. Packer wanted lies to prevail where truth would cause rank-and-file latter-day saints to lose faith in Mormonism in the face of truth.

With the exposure of "Lesson 21-Man May Become Like God" on the Internet, there are over 300,000 convert Mormons leaving or resigning from the Mormon Church every year, and over 200,000 going into inactivity. The fulltime Mormon missionary force is needed just to try to keep recruiting new converts to recoup the tithing losses. There are really less than 9 million fully active Mormons in the world. Because of cognitive dissonance, it takes a Mormon convert from Christianity around 8 years to learn the truth about polytheistic Mormon theology, doctrine, and history. I do hope that there are many more Christians monitoring this website than Mormons.

[Doctor Steuss]

And there's my fremdschämen limit for the month.

Keep fighting the good fight, of inadvertently keeping people in Mormonism by inoculating them so they assume all critics and criticism are similarly... special. One day, you might come to realize you are a Mormon apologists' wet dream. You are literally the type of critic that they hope members will see all critics as. Unserious, uncritical, low effort, and the attention span of an amphetamine riddled gnat.

Adieu. Lol.

Still wondering who weebles and Pyreaux are?

[Physics Guy]

Pyreaux is somebody at the Mormon Dialog and Discussion Board. They're one of the more stalwartly conservative Mormon types, as far as I can tell. No idea who weebles is.

Dr Shades is no defender of Mormonism. He just wants the website he founded to stay accessible to a wide range of readers. When people aren't clear about what they are trying to say, Shades often asks for more explicit information.

I have no intention of ever being Mormon but I've been interested in learning about Mormonism for a few years now, and I've never heard of these "fertility rites" before. I'm as curious as Shades about what exactly they're supposed to be. I am definitely not going to go and read any old books to find out about them, though.

Discussing science with crackpots was one of my earlier hobbies, before I took up Mormonism-watching. Responding to obvious basic questions with suggestions to go and do one's own research, instead of with the kind of brief and clear answer that any real expert would offer, is the kind of thing crackpots do.

I'm not accusing NRnowlinMA of being one, but just pointing out that refusing to answer simple questions makes one look like a crackpot, so if you want to be taken seriously, it's worth making the effort to give a short answer. If NRnowlinMA really knows about Mormon fertility rites, it should be no trouble at all for them to post a sentence or two explaining what they are or were.

[bill4long]

Bill4long, I hope that you have found your way out of the maze of Mormonism.

Oh, heck yeah. I bailed out right near the end of the Hoffman shinanigans.

[NRnowlinMA]

Hey, Physics Guy, I fully answered Shades question, but not to his satisfaction. I believe Shades is pretty shady in his esoteric rule-setting. If Shades is not a Mormon, he is also not very empirical in his approach to facts and the finding of facts. A person discovers from old books the truths about which people in a newer age are unsure. That is how buried treasure is found. That is what the discovery of history is always concerning. Shades, it seems, is somewhat afraid to embrace uncertainty and skepticism as the means to truth. Fact finding comes from human skepticism and curiosity about what is unknown.

The facts are as I have stated. There was a doctrine and rite of ritual fertility as certainly as there was a doctrine of priesthood adoption. That adoption ritual was practiced in Nauvoo and the Utah Valley in temples just like the Adam God Doctrine was practiced along with the doctrine of adoption. The historical records and notations in journals and diaries of faithful Mormons validate the occurrence and practice of these ritual rites. Shades is very obviously not very well read in history, especially Mormon history. No one presumably knows how the ritual rite of adoption was performed, but we know it was performed for a long time. Hence, we know that the doctrine and rites of fertility existed for many years. Yet, no one yet knows how the rite was performed.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

As described in the 1877 book by William Tullidge, "Women of Mormondom," "the rites of adamic fertility are sacred and as eternal as the rite of godhood." The rites are imposed upon the young women to increase the capacity of these virgins to later produce celestial spirits for the glory of the father-god." Hugh Nibley referred to the fertility rites in one of his many publications as a continuation of eternal tradition. The were as secret in function was the rite of priesthood adoption that was practiced in the Nauvoo, Logan, and Salt Lake Temples before it was expunged around 1912. These rites were described as eternal by Brigham Young and John Taylor in the "Journal of Discourses," as was the exclusion of the blacks from the Mormon priesthood until the return of the Mormon Jesus to the earth. Yet, that was expunged in 1978. It is suspected that the fertility rites were practiced by Hugh Nibley on his daughter in the Nibley home basement in Utah, as revealed by hypnotic regression therapy later performed on the adult daughter. These fertility rites are written down someplace, but to date, the whereabouts is unknown.

There were no fertility rites described in that book, unless you’re reaching by describing a marriage rite as a fertility rite.

- Doc

[NRnowlinMA]

I doubt seriously if you have read the book by Tullidge. Had you read it, you would there is a chapter on the preparation of young women for fertility in accordance with the Adam-God doctrine. Even if you read it, and are a Mormon apologist, you would probably not admit that it mentions fertility.

[NRnowlinMA]

Here is a website that contains the liturgy of the Lecture at the Veil, read first by Brigham Young in the St. George Temple in 1877. https://blog.mrm.org/2007/02/brigham-yo ... -the-veil/

Here is a website tries to explain the sexual aspects of the Adam-God doctrine. https://tokensandsigns.org/legacy-of-adam-god/

Here is an academic rendition of celestial sex and the Adam-God doctrine.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/jm ... .45.3.0111

[Dr. Shades]

Hey, Physics Guy, I fully answered Shades question, but not to his satisfaction.

No, you did not.

I believe Shades is pretty shady in his esoteric rule-setting.

Please describe my rule-setting and tell us which aspects are esoteric, and why.

If Shades is not a Mormon, he is also not very empirical in his approach to facts and the finding of facts.

Demonstrate why not.

Shades, it seems, is somewhat afraid to embrace uncertainty and skepticism as the means to truth.

That's a laugh. If you think so, explain why.

Shades is very obviously not very well read in history, especially Mormon history.

Now you're just making things up. What's your motive for doing so?

No one presumably knows how the ritual rite of adoption was performed, but we know it was performed for a long time. Hence, we know that the doctrine and rites of fertility existed for many years. Yet, no one yet knows how the rite was performed.

Then why didn't you just say so?

[NRnowlinMA]

You have refused to answer my question(s), oh, Shady one! You are an esoteric hypocrite in your rule making, for you can like the Mormons did, create doctrine, call it gospel, and change it for the sake of pragmatic convenience a year later. Are you a doctor like Harlan Sanders was a Kentucky colonel? I have an earned master's degree from U.T. Tyler and that is why I use M.A. after my name. Of what are you a "doctor," the art of sophistry? Shades, you seem, to have no idea what comprises a fact, and that would make you unable to derive fact from experimentation and research. You know how to create questions much better than answering them. You are so very prejudicial that you wouldn't be able to derive any truth from research. If someone calls you ignorant and unlearned, an invalid response is to call that person a liar, which you did to me. You are an apologetic name-caller.

Did you know that historians have concluded that the Mexican American War of 1848 was the result of a conspiracy between General Zachary Taylor and President James Polk. It is in all the history books as a fact, but, surprisingly, there is no official written proof establishing that fact. It was established through secondary sources, diaries, journals, and statements made by the people who knew what was occurring at the time. The same thing applies to the doctrine of fertility. It is a fact that it existed and as I had already formerly stated, the written or unwritten liturgy of the rite is apparently not known publicly today. Yet, I did NOT say it was NOT known by "someone." Fred Collier, a fundamentalist Mormon leader and writer, stated that "the most sacred of the rites and ordinances were copied and kept in the personal records of those who participated in those rites; and they are known today, and will forever be known." Collier wrote, "The Unpublished Revelations. . ."

If you are going to run the show, Shades, you shouldn't reveal your ignorance and prejudice through your grave hypocrisy.