Elphaba

Members
  • Content Count

    4260
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Elphaba

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

2065 profile views
  1. Yeah, it's a good thing the anti-Mormons weren't busy that day. The anti-Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster would not have been nearly as specious. From at least the '60s to the mid-'70s, I WAS taught that my husband and I could earn our own world/planet and we would be worshipped by our spirit children who would eventually inhabit that planet, in exactly the same manner Heavenly Father had earned the Earth, sent us, his spirit children to it to gain physical bodies, and we worshipped Him. That's not to say the anti-Mormons are completely innocent, as I don't recall ever hearing we would "have high hopes" for any of this. So, I'll give you that one.Look, I am not saying anti-Mormons don't exist, or they haven't done their damage. We all know they do and have. But far too often they are blamed, especially by people too young or too new to know otherwise, for the creation of misleading issues the Church finds difficult and/or embarrassing when those issues originated, and should have been dealt with by, the Church itself. IMO, this is one of those issues. By the way, when we discussed the characteristics of our respective planets/worlds in early morning Seminary one day back in the early '70s, I decided that on my planet, kittens would never grow up. Elphaba
  2. Hi Guys! I was having a good day and decided to stop in for my once-every-six-month drive-by. Elph
  3. Elphaba

    Polygamy in the afterlife?

    I never said it didn't. That's ridiculous. The policy actually creates a lot of extra sealing work. First, contrary to your claim, not all of the sealings remain in place. As I explained, once all parties have passed on, the wife chooses the husband she wants to spend eternity with, which essentially annuls the sealings of her remaining husbands. Then, these ex-husbands are free to find eternal wives for themselves, which requires new sealings. That's a LOT of extra sealing work. Again, I did not dispute that. I was responding to your claim that sealings won't be swapped around after this life, when many will be. There will also be some new sealings arranged. Regardless, they will all be for people who have already passed on. I have no idea how the mortal temple workers are supposed to know about these sealings, but that's God's problem, not mine. ETA: I just read JAG's explanation of a temple worker receiving revelation re: a sealing. That would work. Elphaba
  4. Elphaba

    Polygamy in the afterlife?

    That's not exactly true. Either Elder Oaks or Elder Wickman (can't remember which) said in an interview that LDS people who are homosexual and remain worthy throughout their mortal lives will no longer be gay once they have passed on. Thus, in the next life, they will have the opportunity to meet and marry someone of the opposite sex, and enjoy all the blessings that entails, for eternity. Again, this is not exactly true. A woman can be married and sealed to all of her husbands, albeit posthumously, with the understanding that in the next life she will choose the one husband she wants to spend eternity with. So, many husbands' sealings will be undone.I do agree with your position that LDS doctrine states men who have married and been sealed to two or more wives will live with all his wives in a "celestial marriage" for eternity. But there do seem to be a variety of ways sealings will be re/arranged in the next life, whether it be due to jilted husbands, or a single ex-gay who finds his wife from amongst the sinners he's teaching the gospel to in spirit prison. Elphaba
  5. I was a member for 25+ years prior to your twenty, and I was definitely taught that if we were righteous enough to attain exaltation we would create and populate our own "planet." As you can see in the references below, "world" is the word preferred by the Church in official publications, but I recall using both "world" and "planet" consistently and interchangeably in Sunday School, Seminary and Institute. It was always a favorite topic of discussion, especially as we got older and became more creative, perceptive, and comical. So, no, the belief that Latter-day Saints will earn their own planet is not something conjured by deceitful anti-Mormons. I agree it has been caricatured by them, but the concept originated with the Church itself. A few references: And my favorite: Elphaba
  6. Elphaba

    Church Rolls Out New D&C Website

    Hey sweetie! What's swingin'? :D;)Elph
  7. Elphaba

    Church Rolls Out New D&C Website

    Perhaps it is the series’ title, “Revelations in Context,“ that is throwing me. I thought it was specifically about, and organized by, revelations received for specific people, with the history provided only to show the context of that revelation. I did notice the essay on Martin Harris does not contain every single revelation directed toward him, so obviously it was not the series' goal to include each and every single occurrence. Nonetheless, the Harris exclusions were fairly unimportant revelations (if one can call a revelation that) compared to Emma's found in D&C 132, and it just makes no sense to me to have excluded it.However, after I re-read your posts, I think you see this as a series about the history of these revelations, and thus, is organized historically. Is that accurate? You had mentioned an upcoming essay on D&C 132 a few times. Does that mean you know, for a fact, that it will be addressed in the series at a later date? If my impression is correct, and the series is organized by revelations, I still maintain it was wrong to exclude Emma’s from D&C 132. Off the top of my head, I honestly cannot think of one revelation that requires additional context more than that one. However, if you are correct that it is organized by history, then I think the series' title choice is confusing, but can also understand why they would leave Emma's D&C 132 revelations out of the already written article. The new one is going to be a doozy and will need all the space it can get. Elph
  8. Elphaba

    worried about our son

    One's First Amendment right to "Freedom of Religion," (which logically must include freedom FROM religion), refers specifically to the government not interfering with someone's religious choices. Parents can interfere all they want.Whether or not it is a good idea to do so is a different issue. But you are not violating his right to freedom of religion if you choose to set some rules regarding his participation in your religious functions. Elphaba
  9. Elphaba

    Church Rolls Out New D&C Website

    Thank you! It's nice to talk with you again. My point is that an article discussing revelations made specifically to Emma should include D&C 132: 51-56. Omitting those verses, which chastise her for not accepting the commandment that Joseph practice polygamy, looks suspiciously like it's been excluded to not have to deal with a difficult part of Church history. That's not what I would expect in a "solid" and "candid" article. Thank you for the JSHistory reference. I had not seen that before, and agree it is persuasive. In my defense, I have read numerous sources stating the U&T was not returned, including the following FAIR article: After reading the reference you provided, I agree with you that my use of "inaccurate" was . . . inaccurate, and that "murky" works well. I think the fact that not one single eyewitness to the translation process from that point on said Joseph used the interpreters that had supposedly been returned, but rather the seer stone, makes it reasonable to conclude we don’t know for sure what, exactly, was “returned” to Joseph. Was it the interpreters, his “gift,“ or perhaps even one of his seer stones? I don’t know. But in an article that is both “solid” and “candid,“ I think it is important to acknowledge the murkiness rather than present only one version of the story as if it is a verified fact, when it’s not. I am sorry to keep harping on the words you used, i.e., "solid" and "candid." I did so to explain they did lead me to expect more from the articles than was perhaps intended. If so, my high expectations were probably unwarranted. Elphaba
  10. Elphaba

    Am I breaking church rules

    I do not see any Wow issues here. He's not a member, and the circumstances under which he wants you to purchase the beer are reasonable, unless he's an alcoholic, in which case, yes, you would be enabling him by purchasing it, and should not do so. On the other hand, I would have a huge problem with purchasing the smokeless tobacco for him. Again, because he's a non-member, I do not see it as a WoW issue; rather, it's because smokeless tobacco contains over 25 carcinogens, making it highly carcinogenic. In fact, one out of three chewers get cancer, be it lip, mouth, throat, esophageal or pancreatic, and they often get it younger than smokers do. That would scare the spit out of me! (Pun very intended. :) ) I know that if I were in your shoes, it wouldn't be a matter of should I buy it for him, but COULD I, given all of the above. I know I could not because I would never be able to live with myself if he did, in fact, get cancer. If you did decide you don't want to purchase these items for him, I would not say it had anything to do with you keeping the Word of Wisdom, because I don't think that's an issue, plus it could make him resentful towards the Church while the two of you are still feeling your way through your return to Church. I would approach it from a life or death perspective, saying you will not enable him to access something that has a one in three chance of killing him. Elphaba
  11. Elphaba

    Church Rolls Out New D&C Website

    Hey JAG,Your description had me very excited to read these essays, and while I did enjoy them, I still found examples of the kinds of omissions and inaccurate information, sometimes major, I’ve come to know and loathe at official Church history sites. For example, the essay “Thou Art an Elect Lady,“ completely excludes D&C 132 where, among other things, God gives a revelation commanding Emma to accept Joseph's other wives. Given the profound impact this revelation had on both Emma and the Church itself, this huge omission is the opposite of candid, and even strikes me as yet another attempt to shove polygamy under the rug, particularly Joseph’s polygamy. I realize I could be wrong, but why else would the author omit such a pivotal revelation in an essay specifically about revelations given to Emma? Additionally, in the essay "The Contributions of Martin Harris," the author writes: This is inaccurate. After the loss of the original 116 pages, Joseph’s “gift” of translation was restored to him, but not the U&T he had originally found with the Golden Plates. From this point on, he used one of the seer stones he had discovered some years prior to translate the remainder of the BoM, and, I presume, the revelation referenced in above. And while I know seer stones are sometimes also referred to as U&Ts, neither of them were the U&T that had been taken away from him as punishment for giving Harris the 116 transcribed pages.Having said that, I do agree with you that including Cowdrey’s divining rod in the essay is candid and, IMO, a step in the right direction. I was also pleased to see how the author of the Martin Harris essay treated Lucy Harris’ actions. Rather than vilifying her like so many church members had done in the past, he wrote that her perspective and actions were understandable given she was terrified she was going to lose everything she had worked so hard for to what she believed was a con man. This is yet another step in the right direction, one I am noticing more and more often. Like I said, I did enjoy the essays quite a lot, and had learned a few things I had not previously known. So, they are definitely "informative." I just had hoped for more "solid" and "candid." Elphaba
  12. You would hate Ogden, Utah. It is packed full of ignorant people who don't realize their efforts to show interest in your life by asking when you're going back to work are actually highly offensive and a sign that they are in legion with Satan. Plus, there are no gun ranges in Ogden. Not one. Oh, and no toddlers either. Well, okay, there are a few toddlers, but their parents are those awful people who can't read minds and therefore don't know what is, and is not, appropriate to say to you. Please don't come to Ogden. Elphaba
  13. Elphaba

    I need to know...

    I saw something on this just the other night, and part of the reason is genetics. Why we like the flavors we do - Chicago Tribune
  14. Elphaba

    A book on Emma Smith?

    How did you know I was posting?!?!?! Your powers scare me. Elph
  15. Elphaba

    A book on Emma Smith?

    I second HiJolly's recommendation of Mormon Enigma if your daughter is old enough to understand a scholarly treatment, including the difficult realities of Joseph's polygamy and how severely they traumatized Emma, her animosity for Brigham that was clearly reciprocated, that sort of thing. In the meantime (if you haven't already purchased the book), Emma Smith Through Her Writings is a lovely essay that gives us a glimpse into Emma's character via the writings she left behind. It's written by one of the authors of Mormon Enigma, but is fairly short and includes nothing that would be historically difficult for a young LDS girl. It's one of my favorite pieces, given Emma is a hero of mine. Even if your daughter is older and has no problem with scholarly treatments, she will enjoy it. Elphaba