Coggins7 wrote: Its quite clear to me, however, as with so many other ex-Mormons who are actually active critics of the Church, that when you left the Church, you failed to get a life in the process,...
And how thankful I for one am that some did not "move on", but spoke out on matters so that those of us coming later would see it and could study it for ourselves without having to reinvent the wheel. Silliness and lies like Decker's ilk will fall by the wayside. If it is true it can stand up to any and all scrutiny.
Each and everyone of us leaving should remember those before us, and leave as big an electronic footprint as possible for others after us to see. Let people choose what is right or true when they can see all sides from all perspectives.
Remember too, that vocal members like Coggins or Pahoran or Juliann or DCP (anyone remember an old LDS poster on several different boards named LeeUniverse...wow!!!) do more harm for the LDS church than they help it. Let's keep them them talking and point people to their words.
And how thankful I for one am that some did not "move on", but spoke out on matters so that those of us coming later would see it and could study it for ourselves without having to reinvent the wheel. Silliness and lies like Decker's ilk will fall by the wayside. If it is true it can stand up to any and all scrutiny.
Each and everyone of us leaving should remember those before us, and leave as big an electronic footprint as possible for others after us to see. Let people choose what is right or true when they can see all sides from all perspectives.
Remember too, that vocal members like Coggins or Pahoran or Juliann or DCP (anyone remember an old LDS poster on several different boards named LeeUniverse...wow!!!) do more harm for the LDS church than they help it. Let's keep them them talking and point people to their words.
Chris <><
Oh the pain, the terrible pain...
Last edited by Dr. Sunstoned on Sat Jun 23, 2007 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.
I ask you again Mr Coggins, how would you feel if Hinkley took your wife off you to be sealed to him while leaving her in your home for you to take care of? He does not have sex with her. Any children you have are sealed to him. With all you talk about eternal marriage that would leave you high and dry without a wife til the next life. Hinkley would probably take her to a higher level in the CK.
I ask you again Mr Coggins, how would you feel if Hinkley took your wife off you to be sealed to him while leaving her in your home for you to take care of? He does not have sex with her. Any children you have are sealed to him. With all you talk about eternal marriage that would leave you high and dry without a wife til the next life. Hinkley would probably take her to a higher level in the CK.
As I have a good chance of being in the CK with her, I see no reason why GBH would make such a claim, as in the Church, two men cannot be sealed to the same woman.
How would you feel if God commanded you to go into a foreign country and kill every man, woman and child, and not leave so much as a chicken alive in your wake, as God commanded David to do?
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.
I ask you again Mr Coggins, how would you feel if Hinkley took your wife off you to be sealed to him while leaving her in your home for you to take care of? He does not have sex with her. Any children you have are sealed to him. With all you talk about eternal marriage that would leave you high and dry without a wife til the next life. Hinkley would probably take her to a higher level in the CK.
As I have a good chance of being in the CK with her, I see no reason why GBH would make such a claim, as in the Church, two men cannot be sealed to the same woman.
How would you feel if God commanded you to go into a foreign country and kill every man, woman and child, and not leave so much as a chicken alive in your wake, as God commanded David to do?
Coggins, I am interested in why you believe Smith didn't have sex with other men's wives. As you know, I believe he did. I think his marriages to other men's wives were not purely dynastic or for the purpose of exaltation. I believe they were based on power and sex. Otherwise, why did Joseph Smith feel the need to hide so many of those marriages from the husbands of the women he married? Why hide them from Emma? What was the purpose of the secrecy if not to cover up extra-marital (or whatever you call it when you're illegally married to several other men's wives whilst being married yourself) sex?
Also, did not Sylvia Sessions question the paternity of her daughter? She seemed to believe Smith could have been her child's father. I'm sure of how babies are made, so if he didn't have sex with Sessions, why would she wonder if Joseph was the father of her child?