Re: John, Have You Anything to Say about the 40 years of "no NCC" lies -- 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: 08:49:31 09/21/11 Wed
Author: George
Subject: Re: John, Have You Anything to Say about the 40 years of "no NCC" lies
In reply to: john 's message, "Re: John, Have You Anything to Say about the 40 years of "no NCC" lies" on 07:40:25 09/21/11 Wed

>since, from what i read, this interview was post
>section 156, i would imagine that the church was
>ordaining women... 156 after acceptance became the
>policy of the church... to say after 156 that women
>would be ordained was not very prophetic...
>
>as for homosexuals being ordained, i have explained
>the policy of the church on that issue. was there
>something you didn't understand?
>
>john
>

In the 1970's, Price was writing that the church intended to ordain women. He was called a liar then, too.

In 2003, I wrote that the church was performing same sex "shacking up" ceremonies. I was called a liar, until the proof came out and Mr. Lindgren was forced to prepare an official statement admitting to it. You see, that was not something that the church "intended" to do, but had already done, so denials were useless at that point. And you are still refusing to believe some of the stuff about what Mr. Lindgren actually admitting in writing.

And the church has avowed homosexuals who have been ordained and are serving in the priesthood with the full knowledge and cooperation of the First Presidency. Whatever policy you can argue in and round about on is fine for you, but the fact remains that Price said that the church intended to do that, and it did. Now, if it found that common knowledge of this pracice, like common knowledge of polygamy, was inconvenient, and tries to put a good face on it with official declarations, that's all well and good, but the practice of having avowed homosexual priests is current.

Perhaps you aren't stupid, John. Perhaps the problem is that you think I am.

George

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