| Subject: | Thus saith the Lord.....Riight. |
| Date: | Aug 14 13:23 |
| Author: | Lilith |
| Mail Address: | A non-Mormon looks at the D&C |
| This nevermo is just wading through the Doctrine and Covenants and I fail to see how anyone could read this and not just see some guy trying to control his 'church'. Do they use this every Sunday? Do they quote from, study and read this? I don't get it. I have rolled my eyes and groaned and laughed aloud through the whole thing. There is very very little I find 'good' and most of that Biblical quotations. |
| Subject: | I have been trying to wade through it too... |
| Date: | Aug 14 13:36 |
| Author: | anw |
| Mail Address: |
| I've only been able to make it 1/2 way, it makes me nauseous. You
are so right. I noticed that too. What really makes me laugh is anyone who had a question
on anything got little personalized messages from God thru JS. 'Oliver Cowdery has confusion on what color shirt to wear, JS goes to the Lord and the Lord's will is revealed..."My son Oliver, hearken and hear and behold what I the Lord God shall say unto you, I the Lord God would have you wear the blue shirt, yea even the bluest shirt, you are my son and blessed are you that believe..." ' I love the one about build Joseph a house... Funny how GBH and brethren don't get word for word messages like this anymore... |
| Subject: | That's why... |
| Date: | Aug 14 14:02 |
| Author: | Stray Mutt |
| Mail Address: |
| ..I recommend the D&C to those who want to know what Mormonism is really like. Doctrinally, the BoM is just a bad imitation of the Bible. All the weird stuff is in the D&C and PoGP. |
| Subject: | I don't know how I ever bought into it?? (hanging her head in shame.) nt |
| Date: | Aug 14 14:58 |
| Author: | LauraD. |
| Subject: | SO do they quote from it a lot? |
| Date: | Aug 14 17:12 |
| Author: | Lilith |
| Mail Address: |
| Or do they mostly use the BoM and Bible?? Or do they just make vague references to the prophets? Or do they just testify to 'knowing'....something... I am really curious. do they base their talks on scipture or what?? I did finish the DandC and the PoGP all today...... |
| Subject: | Yes, they quote from it a lot. |
| Date: | Aug 14 19:08 |
| Author: | Cheryl |
| It has most of the doctrine unique to mormonism. It idealizes the
early church leaders and emphasizes the concept of modern revalation. I think it's central
to mormonism, far more than the book of mormon. The problem is that much of it is embarrassing. That's why they don't give it it investigators. |
| Subject: | I am afraid to say, as a former TBM, |
| Date: | Aug 14 17:19 |
| Author: | Bill Clark |
| Mail Address: |
| that we indeed quoted it, studied it and considered it scripture.
NOW, after the fact, I feel as you do. But don't underestimate the mind of man to belive
whatever they want. Bill Clark Texas Apostate |
| Subject: | rereading section 132 (WARNING: naughty words inside) |
| Date: | Aug 14 19:53 |
| Author: | al-marek |
| Section 132 is the one in which "the Lord" revealed that
polygamy is the true nature of marriage. Here are a few of my thoughts from reading it
while on my way out of the collective: --In Jacob 2 (BoM), "the Lord" condemned David and Solomon for their many wives and concubines; in D&C 132, "the Lord" justifies David and Solomon. --The passage directed at Emma reads like JSmyth was using his position as profiteer to bitch-slap Emma back in line. And "the Lord" tells Emma that if she doesn't accept those whom "the Lord" had ALREADY given to his "servant Joseph," that she will be spanked and not allowed to sit next to Geezus at dinner. Excuse me? Already received? How can JSmyth "already" receive if this is the announcement of the revelation? Morgbots would say that the date is merely when JSmyth wrote it, not when "the Lord" revealed it. But if it is SO damned important, why was it not "revealed" earlier? And bitch-slapping Emma seems to contradict another section that says we should not use our priestcraft powers to coerce others. --I almost returned to the Morg just so I could demand fulfilment of the verse about having 10--TEN!!!--VIRGINS!!! Woo-hoo!!! One of the guys I work with seems to be obsessed w/ virgins--he was bragging about how his third bride is still a virgin at age 40, just keep the faith, brother, they're out there, you can find one, too. --And I like the idea about having concubines: they are not "legally" my responsibility like a wife would be, so if they displease me, I can dump them and get another... and another and another and another and another... --It really seems like this "revelation" is just a way for JSmyth to excuse his dalliances. "Hey, I'm God's Chosen Prophet! If I want your wife... Uh, I mean, if God wants to give me your wife, you MUST obey God!!! And dammit, Emma, you'd better damn well accept or God will mightily smite thee." And if plurality of wives is the true order of marriage in the fulness of the GodSpell, why did "the Lord" not "prepare a way for [his people] to fulfill the things which he hath commanded"? al-marek |
| Subject: | About 132 |
| Date: | Aug 14 20:06 |
| Author: | anw |
| Mail Address: |
| While I fully agree with you that that "revelation"
probably was inspired b/c JS got caught w/ his pants down, the inevitable defense to the
pure ridiculousness of it would be, "but some revelations are of God, some are of man
and some are from the Devil" (as JS once said-will have to find reference-Address to
all believers in Christ by a Whitmer) So alas, THAT one was probably from the devil.... What gets me is it's STILL in the book of commandments... |
| Subject: | Section132 not taught... |
| Date: | Aug 15 14:29 |
| Author: | Pretend TBM |
| Mail Address: |
Our Gospel Doctrine teacher refused to even read a single verse from there in class. She only mentioned that it was in there and said "we don't teach it", but it was there if we really wanted to read it... |
| Subject: | Which is problematic, because... |
| Date: | Aug 15 14:43 |
| Author: | Stray Mutt |
| Mail Address: |
| ...without 132, there's not even monogamous celestial marriage. And without that, there's no need to be temple worthy. And with out that, they lose one of the big incentives for tithing. |
| Subject: | Pay Joseph the $5 you owe him........ |
| Date: | Aug 15 01:07 |
| Author: | Captain Entenille |
| Mail Address: |
| is one of my favorites. What, you wasted a perfectly good revelation
on this trivia? Why didn't you save one that would tell us how to cure cancer, or prevent terrorism, or have world peace? |
| Subject: | I saw policy change a few years ago because GAs were reading it |
| Date: | Aug 15 09:53 |
| Author: | kilgore |
| They used to confirm converts right after their baptism, but then a
few years ago they announced that there would be a delay between the baptism and
confirmation for the bishop to make sure that the member had all the milk he or she needed
(my word, not theirs) before finishing the deal. The baptism wouldn't count until it had
happened, either, so you can imagine the pressure mishies started putting on bishops to do
this as FAST as possible. Hinckley had been concerned about the poor retention of new converts and asked the GAs to prayerfully search the scriptures for a solution. They found some vague reference about the elders of the church teaching recent baptisees, and--VOILA`!--new policy. I was in the stake mission presidency when this happened. I wonder if it's still the case or if it caused their numbers to go down too low so that they found another scripture to justify reversing it. I heard parts of the D&C quoted all the time, but I never read it cover to cover. That's my excuse for not realizing how self-serving all of the revelations inside were, but the real reason is that I already believed that Joseph was a prophet and didn't worry about it. |
| Subject: | Hey, I'm not sure if you were saying this is the case |
| Date: | Aug 15 12:15 |
| Author: | anw |
| Mail Address: |
| or not the case anymore, but when I was baptized, about 3 years ago,
it was on a saturday and they confirmed me the very next day during sacrament meeting. It
was quite the whirlwind. anw |
| Subject: | You either just barely missed the change |
| Date: | Aug 15 22:03 |
| Author: | kilgore |
| (because it was just about three years ago that it changed) or your
bishop was too busy to be bothered (and I could hardly blame him). Congrats on getting back out so fast! |
| Subject: | My first vision... |
| Date: | Aug 15 09:54 |
| Author: | Please Read |
| Mail Address: |
The following D&C scripture changed my life when I was around 13 years old. I was in my first year of seminary and had really bought into the Church for some reason. I resolved to really do well in seminary and actually read what they had assigned. I read this: D&C 1:38 "What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same." When I read that it seemed so amazing. What God said trancended everything. I heard a voice in my head that said "Accept this or deny it!" I was deathly afraid. I had the scripture highlighted in red and the devil's face seemed to appear in the red markings. It was not a still small voice. There was emphasis on the "deny it" part. I thought that satan must have been there to scare me away just as I started reading God's word. I thought about Satan trying to get to Joseph when he prayed. I dug in scripture study like never before. Later, I read the BoM and got warm fuzzies. (Or were those just the good feelings I had associated with my friends and experiences in that ward?) I had a *great* group of friends and leaders as a teen in the Church. I read the Book of Ether in one day. That book should really be a (an R-Rated) film. By reading the D&C first, I really got exposed to the wierd doctrine up front and accepted it as the truth. This was also before the unwritten ban on even mentioning polygamy in Church. Back when "As man is..." was more than a just a couplet. I bought into my whole teenaged fantasy about it. It was well over a decade later that I learned the truth about all of the magical happenings. And I was old enough to understand what it is like for a 13 year old's imagination to get a hold of him by then. And now I am here... I don't know why I thought I would share that. Perhaps others have had similar experiences? |
| Subject: | It would make more sense if it read "Thus saith arrogant prick" because |
| Date: | Aug 15 12:52 |
| Author: | Socrates |
| Mail Address: |
| its really JS talking and not god. Can you imagine what a massive ego this bastard must have had? "I can't say that I AM god (although I secretly believe it) and so the next best thing is to convince everyone that god is talking through me". |