Apostasy in the Reorganized Mormons and LDS Mormons

[Allweather]

Hang in there with me, Alma. I know my demeanor is rough, but I don’t see much point in beating around the bush with nice talk.

Rather than agree that irritating the Christian world isn’t one of our concerns, you simply conclude that since it’s a different irritation it doesn’t count.

I can’t agree with that, because I don’t think it is true. Everything I’ve learned about the trends of the LDS, including the Salt Lakers as well as the RLDS (but probably not the fundamentalists) indicates to me a concerted effort to mainstream itself. I will just leave it at that, because I’m fairly sure you know exactly what I’m talking about. Yet, just one example apart from polygamy: The Great Apostasy. I am aware, from reading, and from monitoring blogs, that the LDS church has grown increasingly sensitive to the manner in which this apostasy claim has been an irritant of orthodoxy, and has distinctly softened its tone over a period of years. “Darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face” D&C 112:23. Also, “And this darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the restored gospel” McConkie, Mormon Doctrine referring to Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, pp 265-326. That’s what Mormons actually believe. But when we so-called apostates talk to them, here and on the streets, we get a much softer approach, one which denies the UNIVERSALITY of the apostasy, and says rather that only the priesthood authority was lost, but that there were, and always have been, good Christian people in the world.

I didn’t suggest that it (polygamy) was devised to solve that problem, merely that it did have some benefits.

My general response is that a sin cannot be justified because it has an apparent good effect. Most sin gets justified by us sinners when we find rationalizations for it. In fact, this tendency is insidious, as I’m sure you know. We often start small and work our way up to big.

You claimed that women don’t ever defend the practice of polygamy, that such was limited to men.

No, I didn’t, and if you re-read my recent post you’ll see where I acknowledge women defenders of plural marriage, and even gave an example of one. It isn’t hard to find prostitutes who will defend prostitution, and I’ll betcha there were African slaves who thought highly of the institution of slavery. There are drug addicts who defend drug use, alcoholics who love their liquor, AIDS patients who continue to have dangerous sex… well you get my point. Presenting female defenders of polygamy proves nothing about the beneficial aspects of polygamy. What I said about most defenders of polygamy being male, I base on my experience here in these forums for the past going-on a year.

Mormons don’t practice it and haven’t practiced it for over 100 years.

Not exactly. I’m sure you know that it continued on well past the 1890s, well into the 20th century in the Salt Lake City LDS, and even continues today among people who call themselves Mormon, and who believe in the BoM and Joseph Smith.

Converts aren’t expected to embrace it anymore than Catholic converts should be expected to embrace Abraham’s polygamy.

No, it isn’t embraced, but it isn’t discussed, either, even though it was the primary causation of Joseph’s murder. Rather than bring out this fact, the LDS historians apparently prefer to characterize his murder as the result of “persecution” that emanated from a hatred of the holy and exalted, rather than a hatred of the sinful and brazen. This is the feeling I get from watching many BYU productions dealing with early LDS history. As for Catholics being expected to embrace Abraham’s polygamy, well, I am not aware of any time in 2k years of Catholic history that this was done.

I will defend the previous practice by both Abraham and Joseph Smith as being biblical and as never having been condemned by Jesus or scripture. You have every right to condemn it as entirely sinful and contrary to God’s word, but that still remains merely your own opinion –unsupported by scripture.Alma

With all respect to you, it is NOT my opinion, but the opinion of the Christian Church(es). Jesus had quite a lot to say about adultery, so I’m not sure how you can claim that he did not condemn it. I don’t know what you mean by saying the previous practice by Abraham was “Biblical.” Maybe by means of a faulty interpretation of it, it could be considered approved by God. The question of whether Joseph Smith’s practice was “Biblical” is less difficult to perceive, if you ask me. It always gets back somehow to Biblical interpretations, and what material is considered “Scripture.”

 

[higherednerd]

As far as post-Manifesto polygamy, yes it did occur, but was not encouraged. In the biography of Camilla Kimball, wife of the late prophet Spencer Kimball, she reveals her childhood experience of it. Her father and his second wife went to Mexico because, they said, they understood that the phrase in the Manifesto admonishing them “to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.” meant that where there was no law, it was ok. Salt Lake basically looked the other way for a time. As time went on, there was a quiet sympathy for families in this situation, and after being driven out of Mexico by Pancho Villa, they tended to live quiet lives, trying not to stick out or be examples.

But why was polygamy so important? Lust is not a solely sufficient explanation, although it certainly entered into some marital selections. Several of Brigham Young’s wives were older women, widows of Joseph Smith. The practice seemed to be dying out in the 20th century until a story about John Taylor told by Lorin Wooley gained circulation in the early 1930s. (mormonfundamentalism.org/history.php) So, there’s history, doctrine, human nature, and politics all mixed together.

Today, practicing or advocating polygamy within mainstream Mormonism is probably the fastest way to get kicked out the door. I’ve known Mormons who’ve believed all sorts of variant doctrines, were survivalists to the point of carrying guns to church, and were downright weird. Nothing ever happened to them, but polygamy WILL get you bounced.

 

[A_Pac]

AW:

I’m finding it difficult to discuss things with you.

Thank you!

I know my demeanor is rough, but I don’t see much point in beating around the bush with nice talk.

I don’t think anyone cares how rough you rare, but how you jump positions, jump to conclusions, build strawman, and make erroneous conclusions. That’s the frustrating part.

Everything I’ve learned about the trends of the LDS, including the Salt Lakers as well as the RLDS (but probably not the fundamentalists) indicates to me a concerted effort to mainstream itself.

OK…be rough, but not so blasted ignorant. You are confounding 2 separate organizations. The LDS and RLDS, as I’ve said to you before, are completely separate entities. The RLDS HAVE tried to become mainstream…downplaying the BoM, etc. The LDS have not. Get your facts right and be responsible in your comments.

The Great Apostasy. I am aware, from reading, and from monitoring blogs, that the LDS church has grown increasingly sensitive to the manner in which this apostasy claim has been an irritant of orthodoxy, and has distinctly softened its tone over a period of years.

What in the worlds are you talking about? It’s a standard teaching in the missionary curriculum, etc.

but that there were, and always have been, good Christian people in the world.

That’s true too!! The problem is instead of letting people speak for themselves, you tell them what they believe and it’s completely incoherent. Just because the authority and complete truth was lost doesn’t mean that there weren’t good people. Your conclusions are naïve.

A Pac

 

[Allweather]

I don’t think anyone cares how rough you rare, but how you jump positions, jump to conclusions, build strawman, and make erroneous conclusions. That’s the frustrating part.

You seem to be the only one registering any frustration. Alma and I have generally carried on good conversations without either of us flying off the handle. This thread faded a month ago. Good grief, man I don’t think you’re reading me very carefully.

OK…be rough, but not so blasted ignorant. You are confounding 2 separate organizations. The LDS and RLDS, as I’ve said to you before, are completely separate entities. The RLDS HAVE tried to become mainstream…downplaying the BoM, etc. The LDS have not. Get your facts right and be responsible in your comments.

I know the difference between the two groups of Mormons (though I don’t claim to be anywhere near expert on either). I disagree with you, though, that the LDS have not made a concerted effort since late 19th century to mainstream themselves, and that the pace of this picked up in the last half of the 20th century. There’s lots of evidence of this. Make a separate thread and let’s discuss it.

the worlds are you talking about? It’s a standard teaching in the missionary curriculum, etc.

That may be. I’m not familiar with the missionary curriculum. My experience of Mormonism is based on personal experience of knowing Mormons and speaking with them, and reading about Mormonism from both pro- and con- sources. I browse around the internet and read other forums, and have read articles written by believing Mormons on Mormon sites that speak of this softening approach to presenting the Great Apostasy out of concern for the effect it might have in irritating believing Christians. I’m surprised, frankly, that you aren’t aware of this.

That’s true too!! The problem is instead of letting people speak for themselves, you tell them what they believe and it’s completely incoherent. Just because the authority and complete truth was lost doesn’t mean that there weren’t good people. Your conclusions are naïve.

A Pac

Well, you’re speaking for yourself here, now, and not providing any information. You’re just kicking up dust. Reminds me of Godzilla in Tokyo, LOL. Relax, Pacman. It’s just chit chat.

 

[A_Pac]

AW,

You seem to be the only one registering any frustration.

Then you’re in denial, because Alma just said the exact same thing!

[quotev I disagree with you, though, that the LDS have not made a concerted effort since late 19th century to mainstream themselves…
[/quote]

Great. I’m just interested in how you could possibly substantiate it.

Well, you’re speaking for yourself here, now, and not providing any information.

Huh? It’s called common sense. There could be an Apostasy with good people on the earth…it wasn’t Sodom and Gomorah. I don’t know what info you want.

A Pac

 

[hcac]

Well the Community of Christ (RLDS) have 8 sacraments, they do not regard The Pearl of Great Price as Scripture, which the LDS does.