Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information -- Mamusz' Restoration Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:36:40 09/07/11 Wed
Author: George
Subject: Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information
In reply to: john 's message, "Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information" on 08:11:07 09/07/11 Wed

>well george! i would think that you and i can both
>agree that the other sections at the very least
>"claim" to be revelations... section 111 clearly
>states that it is not a revelation...
>
>john
>

I agree that they "claim" to be "revelations." However, the CofC has distorted the understanding of the English language to the point where almost no noun or verb has any specific meaning any more.

The reason it isn't a revelation is that the Saints were so anxious to deny any connexion with polygamy that they couldn't wait for the prophet to come back home and issue one. After all, the reason that there is question about which revelations from 1835 to 1844 belong in the D&C is that the church could not afford to print a new edition before the 1844, if I am not mistaken. The leaders really, really needed to get a denial into the book of scripture when it came off the press in 1835.

The lack of such desperation on the part of the leadership, shows that, in that particular sense, the sodomy issue is a little different, Apparently sodomy is more popular in the CofC than polygamy was in the church at Kirtland (which may or may not be the CofC, depending on who is telling the history of the church and to whom.)

George

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: General Denominational (Dis)Information -- john, 06:47:56 09/08/11 Thu