LDS Freedom Forum

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

JSmith wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 10:35 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2022, 1:29 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2022, 1:24 pm I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned this yet, but perhaps one reason the acknowledgement of Heavenly Mother is a big non-starter may have something to do with the following:

1) God is a perfected, exalted man.
2) Exalted men are polygamists (see: D&C 132).
3) God has multiple wives.
4) Ergo, it’s not Heavenly Mother, but Heavenly Mothers.

Focus on this for too long and one’s head might explode.

For us there is only one Heavenly Mother.

There is only one Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother per planet.

NO, if LDS theology on this is carried to its logical conculsion, there would be mothers, a plurality.

which is why the church is terrified of the idea.

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:21 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

JSmith wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 10:35 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2022, 1:29 pm

For us there is only one Heavenly Mother.

There is only one Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother per planet.

NO, if LDS theology on this is carried to its logical conculsion, there would be mothers, a plurality.

which is why the church is terrified of the idea.

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

I think what you're seeing is that ONLY Brigham taught this, and it's entirely dependent on the Adam/God theory (I won't say doctrine, as literally no one else taught it or has taught it in the last 140 years at least).

For my part, I'm not really terrified by the idea of multiple spiritual mothers participating in this world's creation. As others have mentioned, this is all entirely speculative at this point - which is also why the church won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Not sure why you're so stuck on the Eve theory. Do you also subscribe to Blood Atonement and blacks being a distinctly subservient race, subject to their superior white folk brethren? Those are also distinctly Brigham Young hobby horses too.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:30 am

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:21 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

JSmith wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 10:35 am

NO, if LDS theology on this is carried to its logical conculsion, there would be mothers, a plurality.

which is why the church is terrified of the idea.

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

I think what you're seeing is that ONLY Brigham taught this, and it's entirely dependent on the Adam/God theory (I won't say doctrine, as literally no one else taught it or has taught it in the last 140 years at least).

For my part, I'm not really terrified by the idea of multiple spiritual mothers participating in this world's creation. As others have mentioned, this is all entirely speculative at this point - which is also why the church won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Not sure why you're so stuck on the Eve theory. Do you also subscribe to Blood Atonement and blacks being a distinctly subservient race, subject to their superior white folk brethren? Those are also distinctly Brigham Young hobby horses too.

It's not just BY who taught that Eve is our Mother in Heaven and that each world has a single Mother in Heaven. Joseph Smith and others taught this, too.

I also don't have a problem with the teachings on blood atonement, blacks being a under a divine curse, etc. Joseph Smith taught all of these things and they are all supported by the scriptures. These teachings are generally misunderstood, which is why people get worked up about them.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:30 am

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:21 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

JSmith wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 10:35 am

NO, if LDS theology on this is carried to its logical conculsion, there would be mothers, a plurality.

which is why the church is terrified of the idea.

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

I think what you're seeing is that ONLY Brigham taught this, and it's entirely dependent on the Adam/God theory (I won't say doctrine, as literally no one else taught it or has taught it in the last 140 years at least).

For my part, I'm not really terrified by the idea of multiple spiritual mothers participating in this world's creation. As others have mentioned, this is all entirely speculative at this point - which is also why the church won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Not sure why you're so stuck on the Eve theory. Do you also subscribe to Blood Atonement and blacks being a distinctly subservient race, subject to their superior white folk brethren? Those are also distinctly Brigham Young hobby horses too.

It's not just BY who taught that Eve is our Mother in Heaven and that each world has a single Mother in Heaven. Joseph Smith and others taught this, too.

I also don't have a problem with the teachings on blood atonement, blacks being a under a divine curse, etc. Joseph Smith taught all of these things and they are all supported by the scriptures. These teachings are generally misunderstood, which is why people get worked up about them.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:35 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:30 am

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:21 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

I think what you're seeing is that ONLY Brigham taught this, and it's entirely dependent on the Adam/God theory (I won't say doctrine, as literally no one else taught it or has taught it in the last 140 years at least).

For my part, I'm not really terrified by the idea of multiple spiritual mothers participating in this world's creation. As others have mentioned, this is all entirely speculative at this point - which is also why the church won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Not sure why you're so stuck on the Eve theory. Do you also subscribe to Blood Atonement and blacks being a distinctly subservient race, subject to their superior white folk brethren? Those are also distinctly Brigham Young hobby horses too.

It's not just BY who taught that Eve is our Mother in Heaven and that each world has a single Mother in Heaven. Joseph Smith and others taught this, too.

I also don't have a problem with the teachings on blood atonement, blacks being a under a divine curse, etc. Joseph Smith taught all of these things and they are all supported by the scriptures. These teachings are generally misunderstood, which is why people get worked up about them.

I see.

Is there anything a prophet of the church could say that you would consider wrong or misguided? You seem to swallow it all whole, bones and all. For me, that would give me indigestion.

Mamabear wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:35 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:30 am

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:21 am

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 11:11 am

No, LDS theology has consistently held that there is a single Mother in Heaven. Even Brigham Young taught this.

But, I know some people who believe that the people on this planet have different Heavenly Mothers and they aren't terrified of this.

I think what you're seeing is that ONLY Brigham taught this, and it's entirely dependent on the Adam/God theory (I won't say doctrine, as literally no one else taught it or has taught it in the last 140 years at least).

For my part, I'm not really terrified by the idea of multiple spiritual mothers participating in this world's creation. As others have mentioned, this is all entirely speculative at this point - which is also why the church won't touch it with a 10 foot pole.

Not sure why you're so stuck on the Eve theory. Do you also subscribe to Blood Atonement and blacks being a distinctly subservient race, subject to their superior white folk brethren? Those are also distinctly Brigham Young hobby horses too.

It's not just BY who taught that Eve is our Mother in Heaven and that each world has a single Mother in Heaven. Joseph Smith and others taught this, too.

I also don't have a problem with the teachings on blood atonement, blacks being a under a divine curse, etc. Joseph Smith taught all of these things and they are all supported by the scriptures. These teachings are generally misunderstood, which is why people get worked up about them.

Please provide citations that Joseph taught about blood atonement (killing someone for their sins), blacks being inferior, and that Adam impregnated Mary by sex.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2022, 9:39 pm Here are a few of the references I was referring to:

"Attended conference, a very interesting conference, for at this meeting President Brigham Young said thus, that Adam and Eve were the names of the first man and woman of every earth that was ever organized and that Adam and Eve were the natural father and mother of every spirit that comes to this planet, or that receives tabernacles on this planet, consequently we are brother and sisters, and that Adam was God, our Eternal Father. This as Brother Heber remarked, was letting the cat out of the bag, and it came to pass, I believed every word, for I remembered saying to the Brethren at a meeting of High Priests in Nauvoo, while I was speaking to them under the influence of the Spirit, I remarked thus, that our Father Adam had many wives, and that Eve was only one of them, and that she was our mother, and that she was the mother of the inhabitants of this earth, and I believe that also, but behold ye there were some that did not believe these sayings of the Prophet Brigham, even our Beloved Brother Orson Pratt told me he did not believe it. He said he could prove by the scriptures it was not correct. I felt very sorry to hear Professor Orson Pratt say that. I feared least he should apostatize, but I prayed for him that he might endure unto the end, for I knew verily it was possible that great men might fall. I remembered Apostle John E. Page. I saw him take from his pocket a plug of tobacco and bite a mouthful and put it back. It surprised me. I said old chap you will apostatize, but still I really hoped he would not, but he is gone, and I am very sorry for the poor man."

- Elder Joseph Lee Robinson, Journal of Joseph Lee Robinson, October 6, 1854

Kingdom of ZION wrote: ↑April 19th, 2017, 11:28 pm From Joseph Smith, through John Taylor and many ancient records, we are told that Michael brought three wives with him - Eve, Sarah and Lilith. If he had not then he could not demand that his children live this same law in order to inherit his degree of Glory. (Edward Tullidge, The Women of Mormondom, Ch. 20, March 1877)

Luke wrote: ↑July 1st, 2020, 10:30 am

"But from Joseph Smith, through John Taylor and many ancient records, we are told that Michael brought three wives with him - Eve, Sarah and Lilith. If he had not then he could not demand that his children live this same law in order to inherit his degree of Glory." (Eliza R. Snow and Edward Tullidge, Women of Mormondom, Chapter 20)

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:26 pm I suppose there’s a reason Deseret resembled modern Tehran more than a constitutional republic. It was very much run like a despotic theocracy.

Decapitations for sin? Check!
Harems for the righteous? Check!
Religious leaders the final say in every matter? Check!
Reduced rights for women? Double check!

If I’m convinced of anything, it is that the church can survive everything. But no wonder they run from their past.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 9:43 am

OPMissionary wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 9:13 am
If you believe DC 132 is authentic and take the mainstream church's word for everything that has developed doctrinally since the church began then this is really the only logical conclusion.

I think Brigham Young being a fraud is a possibility, which would make this simply false doctrine from his mouth. But if you believe that he was a prophet then I don't see how you wouldn't come to this conclusion of plural Heavenly Mothers.

How is plural Heavenly Mothers the only logical conclusion based on Brigham’s teachings?

He taught that our only Heavenly Mother is Eve and that each world only has one Heavenly Mother.

OPMissionary wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:10 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 9:43 am

OPMissionary wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 9:13 am
If you believe DC 132 is authentic and take the mainstream church's word for everything that has developed doctrinally since the church began then this is really the only logical conclusion.

I think Brigham Young being a fraud is a possibility, which would make this simply false doctrine from his mouth. But if you believe that he was a prophet then I don't see how you wouldn't come to this conclusion of plural Heavenly Mothers.

How is plural Heavenly Mothers the only logical conclusion based on Brigham’s teachings?

He taught that our only Heavenly Mother is Eve and that each world only has one Heavenly Mother.

As above, so below. Polygamy isn't just a Brigham Young theory. It permeated the early church and if we believe that Joseph practiced it then the Adam-God theory isn't even relevant here. The church rejects Adam-God but not D&C 132, which is what this is really about. If polygamy is a divinely ordained law then why would God himself not practice it?

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:54 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:26 pm I suppose there’s a reason Deseret resembled modern Tehran more than a constitutional republic. It was very much run like a despotic theocracy.

Decapitations for sin? Check!
Harems for the righteous? Check!
Religious leaders the final say in every matter? Check!
Reduced rights for women? Double check!

If I’m convinced of anything, it is that the church can survive everything. But no wonder they run from their past.

I don't know what history books you've been reading, but your description of Deseret is completely inaccurate.

No one was actually decapitated or put to death for any sin besides murder, plural marriage was nothing like middle eastern harems, people had a great deal of say over their own lives and could even renounce the faith completely and nothing was done to them, and women actually had more rights and opportunities than virtually anywhere else in the country.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:20 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:54 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:26 pm I suppose there’s a reason Deseret resembled modern Tehran more than a constitutional republic. It was very much run like a despotic theocracy.

Decapitations for sin? Check!
Harems for the righteous? Check!
Religious leaders the final say in every matter? Check!
Reduced rights for women? Double check!

If I’m convinced of anything, it is that the church can survive everything. But no wonder they run from their past.

I don't know what history books you've been reading, but your description of Deseret is completely inaccurate.

No one was actually decapitated or put to death for any sin besides murder, plural marriage was nothing like middle eastern harems, people had a great deal of say over their own lives and could even renounce the faith completely and nothing was done to them, and women actually had more rights and opportunities than virtually anywhere else in the country.

I don’t have to look much further than my own family history to see how polygamy impacted families.

In a nutshell, my great great grandmother had to go all the way up to the First Presidency to petition for help. Her husband, one of Joseph Smith’s nephews, refused to provide for her and their two boys. Said Smith was quite abusive, when he wasn’t negligent, and altogether more interested in getting new/younger brides than fulfilling prior commitments. She was finally granted her petition to leave him, whereupon she met my grandfather (at that point a single man in his 50’s) who was “allowed” to marry her. He was then “rewarded” the week after his marriage with another three year mission to England, separated from his new family and unable to provide for them. It’s a miracle my family line even survived.

But yes, I’ve also read plenty of history books. A paradise on earth it was not.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:33 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:20 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:54 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:26 pm I suppose there’s a reason Deseret resembled modern Tehran more than a constitutional republic. It was very much run like a despotic theocracy.

Decapitations for sin? Check!
Harems for the righteous? Check!
Religious leaders the final say in every matter? Check!
Reduced rights for women? Double check!

If I’m convinced of anything, it is that the church can survive everything. But no wonder they run from their past.

I don't know what history books you've been reading, but your description of Deseret is completely inaccurate.

No one was actually decapitated or put to death for any sin besides murder, plural marriage was nothing like middle eastern harems, people had a great deal of say over their own lives and could even renounce the faith completely and nothing was done to them, and women actually had more rights and opportunities than virtually anywhere else in the country.

I don’t have to look much further than my own family history to see how polygamy impacted families.

In a nutshell, my great great grandmother had to go all the way up to the First Presidency to petition for help. Her husband, one of Joseph Smith’s nephews, refused to provide for her and their two boys. Said Smith was quite abusive, when he wasn’t negligent, and altogether more interested in getting new/younger brides than fulfilling prior commitments. She was finally granted her petition to leave him, whereupon she met my grandfather (at that point a single man in his 50’s) who was “allowed” to marry her. He was then “rewarded” the week after his marriage with another three year mission to England, separated from his new family and unable to provide for them. It’s a miracle my family line even survived.

But yes, I’ve also read plenty of history books. A paradise on earth it was not.

It's sad that your ancestor had such a hard time. People aren't perfect and unfortunately we don't have control over the actions of others. God does use our personal sacrifices for his sake to refine us, though.

inho wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:19 pm There is a quote that is (mis)attributed to Tullidge's Women of Mormondom, but I cannot find it there. It has been quoted a few times in this forum too:

Kingdom of ZION wrote: ↑April 19th, 2017, 11:28 pm From Joseph Smith, through John Taylor and many ancient records, we are told that Michael brought three wives with him - Eve, Sarah and Lilith. If he had not then he could not demand that his children live this same law in order to inherit his degree of Glory. (Edward Tullidge, The Women of Mormondom, Ch. 20, March 1877)

Luke wrote: ↑July 1st, 2020, 10:30 am

"But from Joseph Smith, through John Taylor and many ancient records, we are told that Michael brought three wives with him - Eve, Sarah and Lilith. If he had not then he could not demand that his children live this same law in order to inherit his degree of Glory." (Eliza R. Snow and Edward Tullidge, Women of Mormondom, Chapter 20)

Does anyone know the true source of this quote? I am wondering because I have a vague memory that I have read that in AUB there is a belief in three Mothers in Heaven. And that I had read their names somewhere, and the list purportedly by Tullidge sounds familiar.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:44 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:33 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:20 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 12:54 pm

I don't know what history books you've been reading, but your description of Deseret is completely inaccurate.

No one was actually decapitated or put to death for any sin besides murder, plural marriage was nothing like middle eastern harems, people had a great deal of say over their own lives and could even renounce the faith completely and nothing was done to them, and women actually had more rights and opportunities than virtually anywhere else in the country.

I don’t have to look much further than my own family history to see how polygamy impacted families.

In a nutshell, my great great grandmother had to go all the way up to the First Presidency to petition for help. Her husband, one of Joseph Smith’s nephews, refused to provide for her and their two boys. Said Smith was quite abusive, when he wasn’t negligent, and altogether more interested in getting new/younger brides than fulfilling prior commitments. She was finally granted her petition to leave him, whereupon she met my grandfather (at that point a single man in his 50’s) who was “allowed” to marry her. He was then “rewarded” the week after his marriage with another three year mission to England, separated from his new family and unable to provide for them. It’s a miracle my family line even survived.

But yes, I’ve also read plenty of history books. A paradise on earth it was not.

It's sad that your ancestor had such a hard time. People aren't perfect and unfortunately we don't have control over the actions of others. God does use our personal sacrifices for his sake to refine us, though.

I think the takeaway, after you actually read up on it, is that this was not an isolated incident.

We can shrug our shoulders and say “Ah gee, people are imperfect and bad things happen”, but the truth is this was institutionalized abuse and widespread. And here you are 140 years later explaining away blood atonement, racism, and teenage sexual grooming like it’s some kinda normal thing in God’s kingdom.

You can argue “historical context” and “those were different times”, but I don’t see anything inspired or divine about it.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:29 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:44 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:33 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:20 pm

I don’t have to look much further than my own family history to see how polygamy impacted families.

In a nutshell, my great great grandmother had to go all the way up to the First Presidency to petition for help. Her husband, one of Joseph Smith’s nephews, refused to provide for her and their two boys. Said Smith was quite abusive, when he wasn’t negligent, and altogether more interested in getting new/younger brides than fulfilling prior commitments. She was finally granted her petition to leave him, whereupon she met my grandfather (at that point a single man in his 50’s) who was “allowed” to marry her. He was then “rewarded” the week after his marriage with another three year mission to England, separated from his new family and unable to provide for them. It’s a miracle my family line even survived.

But yes, I’ve also read plenty of history books. A paradise on earth it was not.

It's sad that your ancestor had such a hard time. People aren't perfect and unfortunately we don't have control over the actions of others. God does use our personal sacrifices for his sake to refine us, though.

I think the takeaway, after you actually read up on it, is that this was not an isolated incident.

We can shrug our shoulders and say “Ah gee, people are imperfect and bad things happen”, but the truth is this was institutionalized abuse and widespread. And here you are 140 years later explaining away blood atonement, racism, and teenage sexual grooming like it’s some kinda normal thing in God’s kingdom.

You can argue “historical context” and “those were different times”, but I don’t see anything inspired or divine about it.

I'm not explaining away anything. I simply believe what my religion originally taught. I have studied all of the "issues" people typically get worked up about extensively over the years and have made my peace with each one. Once I discovered what was actually taught and practiced and what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say, these things just don't bother me anymore. It all fits together and makes sense to me.

What's the alternative? Believing that Joseph Smith, BY, and the scriptures teach some horrible things but somehow the restoration is still true and we should just individually pick and choose what we believe and what we reject? Or should we just throw it all out the window as fairy tales?

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:33 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:29 pm

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:44 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 1:33 pm

It's sad that your ancestor had such a hard time. People aren't perfect and unfortunately we don't have control over the actions of others. God does use our personal sacrifices for his sake to refine us, though.

I think the takeaway, after you actually read up on it, is that this was not an isolated incident.

We can shrug our shoulders and say “Ah gee, people are imperfect and bad things happen”, but the truth is this was institutionalized abuse and widespread. And here you are 140 years later explaining away blood atonement, racism, and teenage sexual grooming like it’s some kinda normal thing in God’s kingdom.

You can argue “historical context” and “those were different times”, but I don’t see anything inspired or divine about it.

I'm not explaining away anything. I simply believe what my religion originally taught. I have studied all of the "issues" people typically get worked up about extensively over the years and have made my peace with each one. Once I discovered what was actually taught and practiced and what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say, these things just don't bother me anymore. It all fits together and makes sense to me.

What's the alternative? Believing that Joseph Smith, BY, and the scriptures teach some horrible things but somehow the restoration is still true and we should just individually pick and choose what we believe and what we reject? Or should we just throw it all out the window as fairy tales?

The waters have been muddied.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:29 pm
I'm not explaining away anything. I simply believe what my religion originally taught. I have studied all of the "issues" people typically get worked up about extensively over the years and have made my peace with each one. Once I discovered what was actually taught and practiced and what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say, these things just don't bother me anymore. It all fits together and makes sense to me.

What's the alternative? Believing that Joseph Smith, BY, and the scriptures teach some horrible things but somehow the restoration is still true and we should just individually pick and choose what we believe and what we reject? Or should we just throw it all out the window as fairy tales?

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:40 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:29 pm
I'm not explaining away anything. I simply believe what my religion originally taught. I have studied all of the "issues" people typically get worked up about extensively over the years and have made my peace with each one. Once I discovered what was actually taught and practiced and what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say, these things just don't bother me anymore. It all fits together and makes sense to me.

What's the alternative? Believing that Joseph Smith, BY, and the scriptures teach some horrible things but somehow the restoration is still true and we should just individually pick and choose what we believe and what we reject? Or should we just throw it all out the window as fairy tales?

I'd say a general study of prophets tends to show that not everything they say is 100% inspired or the literal word of God. Why else would we be told to look to their fruits, to pray for discernment, and seek our own revelation on the matter?

One needs look no further than the Journal of Discourse or the personal journals of these men to discover how many incredibly darkened thoughts entered our doctrine and were swallowed wholesale, literal philosophies of men mingled with scripture.

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:54 pm Have you studied the Journal of Discourse much? I actually find it to be full of profound truths and gospel insights.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 3:12 pm

Atticus wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 2:54 pm Have you studied the Journal of Discourse much? I actually find it to be full of profound truths and gospel insights.

Of course - used to be one of my favorite word search sources. That and I could sit there and read for hours. Felt like time traveling to a long since forgotten General Conference.

iWriteStuff wrote: ↑April 4th, 2022, 3:12 pm But I think there's a reason the church has mostly left that material behind. I'll leave you to speculate why.

Luke wrote: ↑April 3rd, 2022, 2:04 pm
Yeah but there's nothing to necessarily disprove the idea that there is more than one Heavenly Mother.