Replies

Hi Colofornian!

Why are you messaging me again?
I thought our argument was over.

You originally misrepresented an LDS article as saying exactly the opposite of what it really said. (LDS spins Jeff's as being a continuation of their prophets).

Your last message corrected this, doing a 180 and saying instead,
"The journalist tried spinning why Jeffs & fLDS polygamy supposedly has NOTHING to do with its source -- 19th century Mormon polygamy."

So you've changed from grossly misrepresenting the LDS article, to correctly summarizing it. That ends the argument right?
I mean that's the only disagreement I had with you right there, and you've fixed it.

Any continuation of the argument depends on pretending I believe things that I don't... which would be silly when I've explicitly said I agree with almost everything else you've written.

I'm not sure why you feel the need to explain the difference between mainstream and splinter mormonism. I don't think you, the articles, or myself are in any disagreement or ignorance on any of this.

As for your analogy with Lutherans, well it's kind of funny for you to argue about the need to specify clearly which group believes what, when that's the whole reason for your error in the first place. You linked to an LDS publication, and said "the mormon church" thinks Jeffs is a continuation of their prophets.

No, the LDS group you linked to explicitly says the opposite of what you said they did, and they're 99.9% of Mormons. Your usage of the word "mormon church" was extremely misleading.

What you don't realize Mount Athos, is that you have come walking right into the midst of a mine field of Mormonism:

* The fLDS claim original possession of the original doctrine of Joseph Smith (polygamy);
* The small Temple Lot segment of Mormonism claim original possession of the plot of land Joseph Smith designated for the Mormon Jesus to return (Independence, MO).
* The Community of Christ (RLDS) claim possession of the original rewrite of the Bible Joseph Smith did (they have the copywright)
* The Salt Lake City Ldsers claim possession of the whole schebang just because they are the biggest, most well-organized, and have the biggest clout/muscle.

What I don't realize eh?

Actually i realize and agree with all of that.
Why do you assume I don't know or believe it?

I only took issue with you misrepresenting what an article and organization said, and you've since corrected your error. I can agree with your opinions on Mormonism, and still say it is wrong to misrepresent what an article and denomination says.

If you want to debate these things you'll have to find someone who actually disagrees with you on them.

If it is enjoyable to misrepresent my beliefs and argue against strawmen then go wild and have fun

What I don't realize eh? Actually i realize and agree with all of that. Why do you assume I don't know or believe it?

See post #61.

If you did realize that, then you would have also realized that you were weighing in on who should be Smith's "prophetic" successors. You would therefore be in a posture to slap down Smith's bloodline as being his successors -- as you would have argued with me had I mentioned Joseph Smith III & his sons/grandsons as being a "continuation" of "prophets."

More minefield-stepping.