How the LDS Church Punishes the Obedient

[_RockSlider]

What I love Consig, is when given some truth/command that my wife and I were obedient to, to have people now look at you in a perplexed way and state something like ... that was never taught/required/commanded.

[_manmormon]

Sometimes the LDS Church ends up punishing those who are most obedient:

1. Those who practiced plural marriage were left out on a limb when the Church changed course and made what was formerly a requirement for exaltation grounds for excommunication.

2. When I joined the Church in 1978, I received repeated messages about becoming a scriptorian which I took to heart. After 30-years of studying Mormonism, I found I had learned what was not to be mentioned or taught. I became extinct in my own lifetime.

3. My wife followed the prophet's counsel to sacrifice her career and get married young and have children. Now we have "I'm a Mormon" commercials extolling the virtues of single parents with careers.

4. The LDS Church admonished homosexual men to get married in the temple and have children to solve their "problem." Now after many such marriages have fallen apart upon the husbands accepting their sexuality and finding same-sex partners, the Church comes up with a policy to punish the children these men were told to have. (I'm sure this has happened to women, as well.)

If obedience is the first law of heaven, why do so many Mormons get punished for it?

Just wondering . . .

1. Except it wasn't a "requirement".... only those called and received the confirmation themselves was Plural Marriage a requirement of Exaltation.
Sure, there would also be in death some more plural marriage when the puzzles were put together to create Eternal Family's for all the righteous, but again, not the same as your statement.

I don't know the percentage offhand, but some 98% of the Church wasn't involved in Plurral Marriage, and the majority of them were just as worthy as single family households. So, shut it with the lying as usual with you anti-mormons.

2. Don't know what you're jibbering about. Not everything is "doctrine" of Gospel that's in scripture. Scripture is simply record, not all of it is "God breathed". Anyway.

3. More lying.... It's still important to have family and be there for family. The church has NEVER "left out" singles and told of their value and worth. It's just not the ideal, but they are still important.

4. More lying..... The Church didn't tell the men to "accept their sexuality and find same sex partners". They chose their lusts over the Gospel. That's their choice, and thus also their choice to sacrifice their children at the alter of their sin.

5. Because your distortion and perversion of everthing Mormon is not "obedience", it's misrepresenting and lying.

I come at all of this from a different direction than most of you. I don't think I'm an anti-Mormon. Many of the people I love and respect are active LDS. I think the Church has become too progressive, and wil eventually get around to changing anything that a large enough group of its members complains about. Consiglieri has a point that you dismiss too quickly. Most of the church is not obedient. Eventually the less obedient win by shear numbers. They then impose their will on the church and the more obedient are left out in the cold

[_RockSlider]

I come at all of this from a different direction than most of you. I don't think I'm an anti-Mormon. Many of the people I love and respect are active LDS. I think the Church has become too progressive, and wil eventually get around to changing anything that a large enough group of its members complains about. Consiglieri has a point that you dismiss too quickly. Most of the church is not obedient. Eventually the less obedient win by shear numbers. They then impose their will on the church and the more obedient are left out in the cold

I believe a lot of this came about via the GBH years of "mainstreaming" ... losing BRM and more deeply correlating.

[_manmormon]

I believe a lot of this came about via the GBH years of "mainstreaming" ... losing BRM and more deeply correlating.[/quote]

not sure what you mean by BRM and more deeply correlating, but the GBH years were certainly a transitioning period for the church. Current leadership doesn't know what to do with the Church. How does that old song go.
He's an old hippie and he don't know what to do
Should he hang on to the old
Should he grab on to the new

[_Sethbag]

What I love Consig, is when given some truth/command that my wife and I were obedient to, to have people now look at you in a perplexed way and state something like ... that was never taught/required/commanded.

All the way up into at least the 60s, if not the 70s as well, the church was teaching that artificial contraception was evil, and that families should be as big as possible. I believe my own parents consulted with a bishop to decide whether or not they could worthily use contraception after my mom's health was so badly threatened by her pregnancies that they were worried having a 5th could kill her.

Now the idea among young Mormons that they'd require the bishop's permission to use contraception would be downright bizarre. I'm sure grandfathers and grandmothers in the church with huge broods all love their vast spawn, but I have to wonder how many young Mormon women may have died or suffered greatly in pregnancy out of fear of disobeying God's will, and this isn't even "a thing" in Mormonism anymore.

[_RockSlider]

not sure what you mean by BRM and more deeply correlating

50's mentality, where men were men, queers were beat up, blacks were in the back of the buss, women were barefoot and pregnant. Bruce R. McKonkies Mormon Doctrine was found on every TBM's book self. Adam God was what the learned knew but was too sacred to speak. If one did not obtain their calling and election in this life, and have multiple wives, there was no way they could qualify for Exaltation in the highest heaven, etc. etc.

[_I have a question]

It's gaslighting.

I thought it was me, at first. I assumed I had misheard/misunderstood what I'd been taught. I went back and read the YW manuals and then I realised I wasn't misremembering. I even downloaded the manuals before they were changed, just in case I wanted/needed to quote from them in the future.

"Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of mental abuse in which information is twisted or spun, selectively omitted to favor the abuser, or false information is presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own memory, perception, and sanity."


Aaronic Priesthood Manual 3; Lesson 31 'Choosing an Eternal Companion'
(The manual is dated 1995 but was in use as recently as 5 years ago)

“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

https://www.LDS.org/manual/aaronic-prie ... n?lang=eng

So that's official advice being taught to young men to marry girls who meet the criteria of being from the same general race as themselves.

The Church Today
Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.24

https://www.LDS.org/topics/race-and-the ... d?lang=eng

You simply cannot trust the Church to stick to its story. The question is how many times does the Church need to change its story before you start wondering just exactly who is at the wheel...
Fool me once, shame on me....etc.

That last statement "Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form" throws under the bus 100 years worth of Prophets and Apostles. All of them. Church leaders today are CONDEMNING what their predecessors did. Stop and think about just what that means in terms of the Prophetic Mantle and the Keys of the Kingdom.

Church leaders want you to swallow the premise that all those dead Prophets and Apostles weren't to be trusted about major policy and doctrinal tenets, but the current ones, you can definitely trust, 100%.
Yeah, right.....