John Dehlin (Mormon Stories) and Kate Kelly (Ordain Women) threatened with excom

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

Some women don't wait for the men to give them authority to do certain things.

Yes--instead of waiting, or just acknowledging that not everyone SHOULD have such authority, they try to SEIZE such authority. That is called "mutiny."

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Yes--instead of waiting, or just acknowledging that not everyone SHOULD have such authority, they try to SEIZE such authority. That is called "mutiny."

Or, perhaps, it's simply listening to the Spirit.

Also, even the church teaches that "prophets" are not perfect, so how can you trust "everything" they say? They also change their minds, often, like with the blacks in the priesthood, so why not with women in the priesthood?

[Libby]

There was a woman I worked with in the Temple who confided to me that she "sometimes" prayed to Heavenly Mother. She said, there are just some things that I think she will understand better, and that I feel more comfortable confiding to her. At the time, I was very touched by that.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

Or, perhaps, it's simply listening to the Spirit.

That's like implying that Judas was in touch with the Spirit but Paul wasn't. It just doesn't make sense for a NON-prophet
to get new orders from God regarding changes in doctrine, but the actual prophet to NOT get the orders. That is a cart-before-horse way of running things that God would not do. God won't do anything without revealing it to His servants the prophets. See Amos 3.

Also, even the church teaches that "prophets" are not perfect, so how can you trust "everything" they say?

Why do YOU trust what Paul taught, over what Simon Magus taught? Paul wasn't perfect, right? So you should always be suspicious about what he taught, and you should trust some regular member's insights over Paul's, if the regular member has a problem with something that Paul taught. Right? That seems to be your position. It seems a bit anarchistic to me.

They also change their minds, often, like with the blacks in the priesthood, so why not with women in the priesthood?

The prophets didn't change their mind. The doctrine was that the day would come when lineage would not be a barrier to getting the priesthood. That day arrived. End of story. It wasn't a matter of a prophet's mind being changed. Unless you want to claim that John's predictions about the future become a "change of mind" scenario once the predicted events come to p***.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Libby

There was a woman I worked with in the Temple who confided to me that she "sometimes" prayed to Heavenly Mother. ......

eve?....or some un-named lady?

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

That's like implying that Judas was in touch with the Spirit but Paul wasn't. It just doesn't make sense for a NON-prophet
to get new orders from God regarding changes in doctrine, but the actual prophet to NOT get the orders. That is a cart-before-horse way of running things that God would not do. God won't do anything without revealing it to His servants the prophets. See Amos 3.

That verse doesn't claim they will get the information "first".

Anyway, I don't believe LDS prophets are even prophets, so that explains it, to me. I don't believe in the LDS version of Heavenly Mother, either. But, I do understand a woman's need to talk to another woman, at times.

Why do YOU trust what Paul taught, over what Simon Magus taught? Paul wasn't perfect, right? So you should always be suspicious about what he taught, and you should trust some regular member's insights over Paul's, if the regular member has a problem with something that Paul taught. Right? That seems to be your position. It seems a bit anarchistic to me.

No, that's not my position (although, I have to admit, it was, at one time). I was going in a direction of pure, personal revelation.

I understand what you're saying, Phoenix. It's just that I have no confidence in LDS prophets, and even when I was in the church, I was of the understanding that one could have personal revelation that is just for them. Pretty sure that was taught. Although, I'm also sure that personal revelation should not have contradicted the prophets. But, there are a lot of LDS out there getting their own revelation about this or that.

The prophets didn't change their mind. The doctrine was that the day would come when lineage would not be a barrier to getting the priesthood. That day arrived. End of story. It wasn't a matter of a prophet's mind being changed. Unless you want to claim that John's predictions about the future become a "change of mind" scenario once the predicted events come to p***.

I think it was Brigham Young that said blacks would get the priesthood dead last, only after ever person of ever race in this world had received it. That didn't happen. I also know that blacks were pressuring them on this issue, especially members...and that there were meetings with them about this issue. It didn't happen that Spencer Kimball just suddenly received a note from God. There was a lot going on in the church, including "agitating" for it, just like the women are doing, now (not the same "form", but definitely agitating).

I think it's interesting that black men got meetings with the prophet over blacks in the priesthood, but the women, who have requested the same, were turned down.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

eve?....or some un-named lady?

An "unnamed" woman. (I mean, I knew her name, but didn't want to post it here).

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

That verse doesn't claim they will get the information "first".

You are correct, but it stands to reason, common sense, and is Biblical precedent that if God appoints prophets to be His spokesmen, and He has an announcement to make, He usually chooses to have it made through those spokesmen first, because that's why they are there in the first place.

Anyway, I don't believe LDS prophets are even prophets, so that explains it, to me.

Are you playing both sides of the fence on this? Are you supporting the possibility that these dissident women got revelations from God that pertain to His church before His prophets get those revelations---and at the same time you're claiming that these women didn't get ANYTHING from God because the God their inspiration came from doesn't even exist?

I don't believe in the LDS version of Heavenly Mother, either. But, I do understand a woman's need to talk to another woman, at times.

Don't these disgruntled dissident women have "real" mothers and aunts and sisters and female neighbors down here on earth who they can talk to?

...when I was in the church, I was of the understanding that one could have personal revelation that is just for them. Pretty sure that was taught.

That is correct.

although, I'm also sure that personal revelation should not have contradicted the prophets.

Correct as well.

But, there are a lot of LDS out there getting their own revelation about this or that.

"A lot" is a relative term. As a percentage of the total, I'd bet it's less than 1 percent.

I think it's interesting that black men got meetings with the prophet over blacks in the priesthood, but the women, who have requested the same, were turned down.

Do you think the difference might be that it had always been predicted that black MEN would someday be eligible, while in the case of women, that was never in God's plan, since He had other, equally cool, plans for them?

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

You are correct, but it stands to reason, common sense, and is Biblical precedent that if God appoints prophets to be His spokesmen, and He has an announcement to make, He usually chooses to have it made through those spokesmen first, because that's why they are there in the first place.

It stands to reason that they would make the final decision and implement it. I don't think it would be necessary that they would be the first to know.

Are you playing both sides of the fence on this? Are you supporting the possibility that these dissident women got revelations from God that pertain to His church before His prophets get those revelations---and at the same time you're claiming that these women didn't get ANYTHING from God because the God their inspiration came from doesn't even exist?

Yes. I believe there were prophets, though. I don't believe the LDS men at the top are prophets or receive revelation of any kind. My support for these women is more about equity in the church. But, perhaps, what they are doing will lead them out, which, from my perspective, would not be a bad thing.

Don't these disgruntled dissident women have "real" mothers and aunts and sisters and female neighbors down here on earth who they can talk to?

Who said this woman I spoke of was disgruntled? She was not. She was very devout and loved the church. As far as women (or men, for that matter) having someone in real life they can talk to (about very private things) that is not always the case.

"A lot" is a relative term. As a percentage of the total, I'd bet it's less than 1 percent.

I would guess a lot higher, but that's not something we can fully know. People don't always talk about their true feelings or beliefs.

Do you think the difference might be that it had always been predicted that black MEN would someday be eligible, while in the case of women, that was never in God's plan, since He had other, equally cool, plans for them?

No, I don't. Did you ignore the circumstances laid out, under which blacks would finally be given the priesthood? That was not the way it went down.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

It stands to reason that they would make the final decision and implement it. I don't think it would be necessary that they would be the first to know

Can you come up with any such precedent in the Bible? For example, did God announce His plan to help the Israelites escape Egypt to Aaron, Miriam, etc. BEFORE He announced it to Moses?

Yes. I believe there were prophets, though. I don't believe the LDS men at the top are prophets or receive revelation of any kind.

Then what you ACTUALLY believe is that any inspiration these women received, where God was gonna change church policy and allow them to be ordained clergy, is FALSE inspiration. Correct? If anything, you believe that if these women have been getting such revelations, it came from SATAN, not from God. Right?

My support for these women is more about equity in the church.

Do you really want them to get what they want--the chance to be part of the hierarchy of a church you believe is false, non-Christian, possibly run by Satan? Why would you want that for those women?

But, perhaps, what they are doing will lead them out, which, from my perspective, would not be a bad thing.

Do you realize the twists in logic you are resorting to? Now you say it would be a GOOD thing if these women DON'T get what they're demanding, because it might cause them to quit the church?

So do you hope they get what they're demanding? Or do you hope their demands are declined?

Did you ignore the circumstances laid out, under which blacks would finally be given the priesthood?

I know what BY's OPINION was about what how long HE felt it would be before the change was made.

I can tell you that when the change in policy was announced in 1978, it didn't cause ME to say "Dang! The prophets LIED to us!"

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Can you come up with any such precedent in the Bible? For example, did God announce His plan to help the Israelites escape Egypt to Aaron, Miriam, etc. BEFORE He announced it to Moses?

Maybe. I'm pretty sure the people of Israel knew they would be freed, at some point. They prayed for it.

Then what you ACTUALLY believe is that any inspiration these women received, where God was gonna change church policy and allow them to be ordained clergy, is FALSE inspiration. Correct? If anything, you believe that if these women have been getting such revelations, it came from SATAN, not from God. Right?

No, I don't believe that. Don't put words in my mouth. I have never said anything about Satan inspired revelation...not these women and not the church, as a whole. I believe Joseph was a false prophet and all of those who have followed him have simply been misguided.

Do you really want them to get what they want--the chance to be part of the hierarchy of a church you believe is false, non-Christian, possibly run by Satan? Why would you want that for those women?

Like I said, I've never said anything about Satan. If they're going to stay in the church and want to be equal, in authority to men, why not? I do think many of them will leave over this issue, though.

Do you realize the twists in logic you are resorting to? Now you say it would be a GOOD thing if these women DON'T get what they're demanding, because it might cause them to quit the church?

So do you hope they get what they're demanding? Or do you hope their demands are declined?

Their demands, so far, have been declined. I don't know what will happen, but I support their right to "agitate" for change, if that's what they want. I like to see people standing up for what they believe in.

I know what BY's OPINION was about what how long HE felt it would be before the change was made.

I can tell you that when the change in policy was announced in 1978, it didn't cause ME to say "Dang! The prophets LIED to us!"

Well, that's good, but maybe you should have noticed that several of the prophets got this one wrong? Lots of other folks certainly did.

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

I have never said anything about Satan inspired revelation...not these women and not the church, as a whole.

So when virtually ALL of your newly re-found friends at Carm (the ones who claim to be ex-LDS) say that the LDS church is satanic, all the angelic visitations to its members were demons, etc.---you don't believe they are telling the truth. Correct?
Do you realize what that says about them?

Like I said, I've never said anything about Satan.

But your "friends" have said plenty about Satan being in the temples, being the "god" who LDS pray to, etc. Either they are right, or they are wrong because YOU are right. You once knew that they were wrong. Do you still know that? If yes, then what the heck are you doing in their camp?

Their demands, so far, have been declined. I don't know what will happen, but I support their right to "agitate" for change, if that's what they want. I like to see people standing up for what they believe in.

Yeah? Like the LDS trying to stand up for their right to marry more than one wife, in the 1840s? You know what happened back then, when most LDS were standing up for their right to reside in Missouri?

Extermination Order that gave them a few weeks to be out of the state, and then any LDS still in Missouri after the deadline could legally be killed on sight.

One of your re-discovered friends said that if he had lived in Carthage, Illinois in 1844, he would have been one of the lynch mob who murdered Joseph and Hyrum Smith--he would have been the one p***ing out the ammo to the mob.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

So when virtually ALL of your newly re-found friends at Carm (the ones who claim to be ex-LDS) say that the LDS church is satanic, all the angelic visitations to its members were demons, etc.---you don't believe they are telling the truth. Correct?
Do you realize what that says about them?


But your "friends" have said plenty about Satan being in the temples, being the "god" who LDS pray to, etc. Either they are right, or they are wrong because YOU are right. You once knew that they were wrong. Do you still know that? If yes, then what the heck are you doing in their camp?


Yeah? Like the LDS trying to stand up for their right to marry more than one wife, in the 1840s? You know what happened back then, when most LDS were standing up for their right to reside in Missouri?

Extermination Order that gave them a few weeks to be out of the state, and then any LDS still in Missouri after the deadline could legally be killed on sight.

One of your re-discovered friends said that if he had lived in Carthage, Illinois in 1844, he would have been one of the lynch mob who murdered Joseph and Hyrum Smith--he would have been the one p***ing out the ammo to the mob.

It's like this, either the LDSinc. or Christians are being mislead by Satan, and I don't put my trust in the imaginary mind of the con-man skirt chasing Joseph Smith jr. Let us have no ambiguity, one or the other is wrong.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by realfakehair

and i don't put my trust in the imaginary mind of the con-man skirt chasing joseph smith jr.

Amen!.......

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

So when virtually ALL of your newly re-found friends at Carm (the ones who claim to be ex-LDS) say that the LDS church is satanic, all the angelic visitations to its members were demons, etc.---you don't believe they are telling the truth. Correct?
Do you realize what that says about them?


But your "friends" have said plenty about Satan being in the temples, being the "god" who LDS pray to, etc. Either they are right, or they are wrong because YOU are right. You once knew that they were wrong. Do you still know that? If yes, then what the heck are you doing in their camp?


Yeah? Like the LDS trying to stand up for their right to marry more than one wife, in the 1840s? You know what happened back then, when most LDS were standing up for their right to reside in Missouri?

Extermination Order that gave them a few weeks to be out of the state, and then any LDS still in Missouri after the deadline could legally be killed on sight.

One of your re-discovered friends said that if he had lived in Carthage, Illinois in 1844, he would have been one of the lynch mob who murdered Joseph and Hyrum Smith--he would have been the one p***ing out the ammo to the mob.

Don't try to "guilt" me, Phoenix. My "re-found friends" can believe whatever they want. I'm just saying, *I* have not ever said anything about Satan. It stands to reason that "Satan" would be behind a false prophet. But, humans fall into error all the time, especially, when not being guided by the Holy Spirit.

Critics of the church are sometimes wrong about specifics (including myself, at times), but they are "right" about one thing. Joseph Smith was not a prophet..and his theology is way off the charts.

I think my short stint as an "anti-Mormon" is coming to an end. It's just not my calling. I really suck at it. lol

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Libby

Don't try to "guilt" me, Phoenix.

It's not that, really. I just want to make sure you know what kind of people you're jumping into bed with, to minimize the chance that you will regret it later. Because I care about you. (I don't care about them very much)

My "re-found friends" can believe whatever they want.

When you walked away from them the last time, they stated their belief--actually, they claimed to KNOW--that you were never saved, never a real Christian.
So is it really wise to trust what THEY claim to know about the LDS church, when they were so wrong about what they claimed to know about you, about who is and isn't saved, etc.? They seem less reliable than a Magic 8-ball.

I'm just saying, *I* have not ever said anything about Satan.

Who do YOU think appeared in vision to J. Smith when, at age 14, he prayed to the God of the Bible, in name of the Jesus of the Bible, for help figuring out which church he should join? Who do you think appeared to him and told him about the gold-colored plates with inspired words about God and Christ engraved on them?

a) Heavenly beings.
b) Satanic beings.
c) No beings at all.

I think my short stint as an "anti-Mormon" is coming to an end. It's just not my calling. I really suck at it. lol

I agree. You are not good at it because your heart is not really in it--being mean to people, mocking their cherished beliefs about God and Christ, making fun of their clothing and lifestyle choices, is not your nature. Any attempts by you to attack the LDS are half-hearted, and it shows. You're not mean enough, immature enough, or insecure enough to be a real anti-LDS.

[theway]

Originally Posted by Libby

I think it's very unfair to characterize what these women did, in that way. They lined up in a holding area, waiting to ask permission to be allowed into the priesthood session. They were not carrying signs, they were civil and orderly. The did not "march" anywhere, nor did they make "demands". They quietly and respectfully asked (one by one) for admission into the priesthood session. That wasn't even asking for the priesthood. Would it have really been so awful for the church to allow them in?

You are missing the important part. They were told beforehand not to show up during the Priesthood Session, and not to ask to get in.

[theway]

Originally Posted by Libby

I know very well, that some women in this group do not really care about the priesthood (they believe they already have it). Even one of the women interviewed, said that very thing. I knew two women who gave their own children, hands on blessings, way back when I was still in the church. I also knew women who prayed to Heavenly Mother. Some women don't wait for the men to give them authority to do certain things. This group has many members with slightly different goals. The thing that binds them is the desire to have more input and visability in the church. Did you know that the Conference Center didn't have any pictures of women on the walls, until just recently?

They are all united however in their one sin.

It's the exact same thing Saul was guilty of when he decided not to wait for any priesthood authority to make the sacrifice.

These women need to do a little but more reading in their Bibles.

1 Samuel 15:22 ....Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, ......

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by theway

1 Samuel 15:22 ....Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, ......

I wonder why ol jo didn't use this verse when hitting on Nancy Rigdon?

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Libby

Don't try to "guilt" me, Phoenix. My "re-found friends" can believe whatever they want. I'm just saying, *I* have not ever said anything about Satan. It stands to reason that "Satan" would be behind a false prophet. But, humans fall into error all the time, especially, when not being guided by the Holy Spirit.

Critics of the church are sometimes wrong about specifics (including myself, at times), but they are "right" about one thing. Joseph Smith was not a prophet..and his theology is way off the charts.

I think my short stint as an "anti-Mormon" is coming to an end. It's just not my calling. I really suck at it. lol

while it would "fit" that Satan and other evil spirits are found and worshiped inside the Mormon Temple...the trouble is that Im not all that up to date on the day-to-day activity of the demons.....Nor do i know when they come and go?....

So while it "fits' that Mormons worship Satan inside the temple, its not something we can really nail-down.

[RealFakeHair]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

while it would "fit" that Satan and other evil spirits are found and worshiped inside the Mormon Temple...the trouble is that Im not all that up to date on the day-to-day activity of the demons.....Nor do i know when they come and go?....

So while it "fits' that Mormons worship Satan inside the temple, its not something we can really nail-down.

If it is not of God, then who is it from?

[Libby]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

while it would "fit" that Satan and other evil spirits are found and worshiped inside the Mormon Temple...the trouble is that Im not all that up to date on the day-to-day activity of the demons.....Nor do i know when they come and go?....

So while it "fits' that Mormons worship Satan inside the temple, its not something we can really nail-down.

Exactly. It's not something I am willing to say or judge and I've been in the Temple.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by RealFakeHair

If it is not of God, then who is it from?

Human error. The thing is, LDS believe they are worshipping Christ, not Satan. When I think of Satan worshippers, I think of people standing before a statue of Satan (or a Pentagram or something)...and having full knowledge of "exactly" what they are doing and who they are worshipping. There ARE such people and I'm not willing to put LDS in the same category.

[alanmolstad]

it would fit.....we know its not the true God of the Bible....

But aside from that?.........

[alanmolstad]

artwork paints Satan with goat feet and a red tail....


But the reality is that the Bible warns us that Satan will appear as an angel of light.....
Satan will appear to us as we expect an angel to appear as.....

Thats is the reason we were warned to expect an angel to bring a different message.