Religion isn’t going away, it’s transforming

[drumdude]

I’m aware of how the church has tried to retroactively spin the new and everlasting covenant as meaning something different than it originally meant. Joseph believed he was restoring polygamy. He believed it was the new and everlasting covenant. This is why Mormon polygamists correctly believe (within the Mormon context) that the manifesto was the beginning of a second great apostasy.

The simple and plain truth is that polygamy was first practiced by Smith (his affair with the underage house servant girl), then first taught in secret by Smith(adding dozens of wives for him and his close friends), and only after the fact did he come up with the idea of sealing to retroactively justify his debauchery.

Just follow the history.

[MG 2.0]

I’m aware of how the church has tried to retroactively spin the new and everlasting covenant as meaning something different than it originally meant. Joseph believed he was restoring polygamy. He believed it was the new and everlasting covenant. This is why Mormon polygamists correctly believe (within the Mormon context) that the manifesto was the beginning of a second great apostasy.

The simple and plain truth is that polygamy was first practiced by Smith (his affair with the underage house servant girl), then first taught in secret by Smith(adding dozens of wives for him and his close friends), and only after the fact did he come up with the idea of sealing to retroactively justify his debauchery.

Just follow the history.

OK. Let's go way back to D&C Section 66

2 Verily I say unto you, blessed are you for receiving mine everlasting covenant, even the fulness of my gospel, sent forth unto the children of men, that they might have life and be made partakers of the glories which are to be revealed in the last days, as it was written by the prophets and apostles in days of old.
D&C 66:2

In regards to polygamy Joseph Smith taught that the "new and everlasting covenant" primarily referred to the covenant of eternal marriage, which could be either monogamous or, when commanded by God, plural (polygamous).

This covenant, often referred to by the Lord as the “new and everlasting covenant,” encompasses the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, including all ordinances and covenants necessary for the salvation of mankind. Although establishing the Lord’s new and everlasting covenant on the earth is a primary purpose of the Restoration, some Latter-day Saints do not understand the covenant’s significance and the promise of good things to come for those who abide within it.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... t?lang=eng

Look at more sources.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

I’m aware of how the church has tried to retroactively spin the new and everlasting covenant as meaning something different than it originally meant. Joseph believed he was restoring polygamy. He believed it was the new and everlasting covenant. This is why Mormon polygamists correctly believe (within the Mormon context) that the manifesto was the beginning of a second great apostasy.

The simple and plain truth is that polygamy was first practiced by Smith (his affair with the underage house servant girl), then first taught in secret by Smith(adding dozens of wives for him and his close friends), and only after the fact did he come up with the idea of sealing to retroactively justify his debauchery.

Just follow the history.

OK. Let's go way back to D&C Section 66

2 Verily I say unto you, blessed are you for receiving mine everlasting covenant, even the fulness of my gospel, sent forth unto the children of men, that they might have life and be made partakers of the glories which are to be revealed in the last days, as it was written by the prophets and apostles in days of old.
D&C 66:2

In regards to polygamy Joseph Smith taught that the "new and everlasting covenant" primarily referred to the covenant of eternal marriage, which could be either monogamous or, when commanded by God, plural (polygamous).

This covenant, often referred to by the Lord as the “new and everlasting covenant,” encompasses the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, including all ordinances and covenants necessary for the salvation of mankind. Although establishing the Lord’s new and everlasting covenant on the earth is a primary purpose of the Restoration, some Latter-day Saints do not understand the covenant’s significance and the promise of good things to come for those who abide within it.
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... t?lang=eng

Look at more sources.

Regards,
MG

Look at the motivation of those rewriting history.

It’s as simple as reading the history in context, as it unfolded. Not reading whitewashed modern Mormons spinning it to fit their necessary theological narrative.

But I understand why you and other Mormons have to twist it to fit your existing beliefs. Otherwise the cognitive dissonance would lead you to the same place it leads ex-Mormons.

[malkie]

Unless it’s changing the temple garments, letting blacks have the priesthood, letting women speak in general conference, amending the introduction to the Book of Mormon, forbidding bishops to interview children alone, letting Mormon missionaries communicate with the outside world…

You've hit on some changes in policy and in the case of the Book of Mormon, further knowledge that has become available.

Regards,
MG

You call it further knowledge, I call it bending to social norms.

It’s a time honored Mormon tradition since they abolished the “new and everlasting covenant.” So much for the restoration.

Ahhhh, the old "just a policy" argument - usually invoked after the fact.

However:

Black people and temple and priesthood policies in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
Church leaders taught for decades that the priesthood ordination and temple ordinance ban was commanded by God. Brigham Young taught it was a "true eternal principle the Lord Almighty has ordained." In 1949, the First Presidency (under George Albert Smith) officially stated that it was "not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord".  A second First Presidency statement (this time under McKay) in 1969 reemphasized that this "seeming discrimination by the Church towards the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God".  As president of the church, Kimball also emphasized in a 1973 press conference that the ban was "not my policy or the Church's policy. It is the policy of the Lord who has established it." On the topic of doctrine and policy for the race ban lifting the apostle Dallin H. Oaks stated in 1988, "I don't know that it's possible to distinguish between policy and doctrine in a church that believes in continuing revelation and sustains its leader as a prophet. ... I'm not sure I could justify the difference in doctrine and policy in the fact that before 1978 a person could not hold the priesthood and after 1978 they could hold the priesthood."

To preserve context I rearranged some of the quoted material get past the board limit on quote nesting. If I got the essentials wrong, let me know. It's the early hours of the morning here and I'm sleeping

[I Have Questions]

But maybe you have an example where the SLC LDS Church showed itself to be ahead of our time?

Public support for nondiscrimination ordinances in November 2009.

You think the Church publicly supporting non discrimination in 2009 is an example of revelation and ahead of its time? Are you being serious?

Early organization and empowerment of women through the Relief Society.

Well it was the ladies that proposed this, it wasn’t a revelation. Nor was it ahead of its time as there was a general movement towards women’s organisations in the 1840’s in the New York area specifically.

Social Service Department (1919), which was a pioneering effort in professionalizing social work within a religious organization.

”The first large-scale social policy program in the United States was assistance to Union Civil War veterans and their families.[13] The program provided pensions and disability assistance.[13] From 1890 to the early 1920s, the U.S. provided what Theda Skocpol characterized as "maternalist policies", as it provided pensions for widowed mothers.”

MG. Please, I’m begging you, read and comprehend the question, and do proper research into your answers before posting them. By proper research I mean don’t just do a quick Google search to find stuff that supports what you want to be true. Look at the stuff that might show you that you’re wrong, as a double check. It will save everyone a lot of time if you correct yourself before posting factually incorrect responses. I’m trying to converse with you but you make it difficult by responding with this kind of badly researched “lazy learner” type answer.

[MG 2.0]

I’m trying to converse with you but you make it difficult by responding with this kind of badly researched “lazy learner” type answer.

The response one might expect.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

But I understand why you and other Mormons have to twist it to fit your existing beliefs. Otherwise the cognitive dissonance would lead you to the same place it leads ex-Mormons.

Again, the response one might expect.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Public support for nondiscrimination ordinances in November 2009.

You think the Church publicly supporting non discrimination in 2009 is an example of revelation and ahead of its time? Are you being serious?

Early organization and empowerment of women through the Relief Society.

Well it was the ladies that proposed this, it wasn’t a revelation. Nor was it ahead of its time as there was a general movement towards women’s organisations in the 1840’s in the New York area specifically.

Social Service Department (1919), which was a pioneering effort in professionalizing social work within a religious organization.

”The first large-scale social policy program in the United States was assistance to Union Civil War veterans and their families.[13] The program provided pensions and disability assistance.[13] From 1890 to the early 1920s, the U.S. provided what Theda Skocpol characterized as "maternalist policies", as it provided pensions for widowed mothers.”

MG. Please, I’m begging you, read and comprehend the question, and do proper research into your answers before posting them. By proper research I mean don’t just do a quick Google search to find stuff that supports what you want to be true. Look at the stuff that might show you that you’re wrong, as a double check. It will save everyone a lot of time if you correct yourself before posting factually incorrect responses. I’m trying to converse with you but you make it difficult by responding with this kind of badly researched “lazy learner” type answer.

That 'list' he gave was clearly A.I. generated. He's gone from hiding manipulative prompts to derailing threads with A.I., and now to simply representing A.I. content as his own work. He is dishonest and disingenuous, and as Everybody Wang Chung says, "quite the missionary." Using A.I. as he does is the epitome of 'lazy learning.'

[I Have Questions]

You think the Church publicly supporting non discrimination in 2009 is an example of revelation and ahead of its time? Are you being serious?
Well it was the ladies that proposed this, it wasn’t a revelation. Nor was it ahead of its time as there was a general movement towards women’s organisations in the 1840’s in the New York area specifically.
”The first large-scale social policy program in the United States was assistance to Union Civil War veterans and their families.[13] The program provided pensions and disability assistance.[13] From 1890 to the early 1920s, the U.S. provided what Theda Skocpol characterized as "maternalist policies", as it provided pensions for widowed mothers.”

MG. Please, I’m begging you, read and comprehend the question, and do proper research into your answers before posting them. By proper research I mean don’t just do a quick Google search to find stuff that supports what you want to be true. Look at the stuff that might show you that you’re wrong, as a double check. It will save everyone a lot of time if you correct yourself before posting factually incorrect responses. I’m trying to converse with you but you make it difficult by responding with this kind of badly researched “lazy learner” type answer.

That 'list' he gave was clearly A.I. generated. He's gone from hiding manipulative prompts to derailing threads with A.I., and now to simply representing A.I. content as his own work. He is dishonest and disingenuous, and as Everybody Wang Chung says, "quite the missionary." Using A.I. as he does is the epitome of 'lazy learning.'

Yep. It’s also against the new board rule.

For some reason he’s unable to do his own, properly referenced, research and posting. So now he masquerades his A.I. content rather than sticking to the rules.

[MG 2.0]

You think the Church publicly supporting non discrimination in 2009 is an example of revelation and ahead of its time? Are you being serious?
Well it was the ladies that proposed this, it wasn’t a revelation. Nor was it ahead of its time as there was a general movement towards women’s organisations in the 1840’s in the New York area specifically.
”The first large-scale social policy program in the United States was assistance to Union Civil War veterans and their families.[13] The program provided pensions and disability assistance.[13] From 1890 to the early 1920s, the U.S. provided what Theda Skocpol characterized as "maternalist policies", as it provided pensions for widowed mothers.”

MG. Please, I’m begging you, read and comprehend the question, and do proper research into your answers before posting them. By proper research I mean don’t just do a quick Google search to find stuff that supports what you want to be true. Look at the stuff that might show you that you’re wrong, as a double check. It will save everyone a lot of time if you correct yourself before posting factually incorrect responses. I’m trying to converse with you but you make it difficult by responding with this kind of badly researched “lazy learner” type answer.

That 'list' he gave was clearly A.I. generated. He's gone from hiding manipulative prompts to derailing threads with A.I., and now to simply representing A.I. content as his own work. He is dishonest and disingenuous, and as Everybody Wang Chung says, "quite the missionary." Using A.I. as he does is the epitome of 'lazy learning.'

I did use a search tool (my guess is that others do too). Good information, yes? At the very least, worthy of some consideration. Thank you for bringing this important information to the forefront of the discussion, Marcus.

Regards,
MG