RE: What are some good checkmate arguments against religion?
May 24, 2014 at 3:08 pm
(This post was last modified: May 24, 2014 at 3:19 pm by vorlon13.)
I haven't ever quizzed any Lutherans about this, but I've wondered, since they still have "LUTHERan" on the sign outside their building, how is it they can back pedal on Luther's Antisemitism ??
Like, aren't they stuck with it? If Luther was wrong about that, doesn't that open the door on questioning the 95 thesis ?? Where does it stop ??
So too, Joseph Smith's (and Brigham Young's) astonishing racism. And if 'mainline' LDS changes something (as they did in the late 70s) regarding blacks in the priesthood, would they acknowledge they changed something, and in the eyes of a hypothetical LDS schismatic group that did NOT change that at the time, would they acknowledge that in the eyes of that group, THEY were now a cult, since they are now contradicting the revered teachings of Smith (and Young) on that topic?
(I also note, that near as I can tell, the change in the 70s was accomplished via executive fiat, and the 'revered' writings in their voluminous paperwork remains unchanged. It occurs to me, should social mores change back, it might be rather easy to reverse a 'mistaken' decree, than to chip off the correcting fluid in the BoM to put things back they way they were)
(I'm implying that should the need arise, the LDS hierarchy has left an escape route to revert back to their racist teachings, should membership or financial concerns arise sufficient to make the change back attractive)
Like, aren't they stuck with it? If Luther was wrong about that, doesn't that open the door on questioning the 95 thesis ?? Where does it stop ??
So too, Joseph Smith's (and Brigham Young's) astonishing racism. And if 'mainline' LDS changes something (as they did in the late 70s) regarding blacks in the priesthood, would they acknowledge they changed something, and in the eyes of a hypothetical LDS schismatic group that did NOT change that at the time, would they acknowledge that in the eyes of that group, THEY were now a cult, since they are now contradicting the revered teachings of Smith (and Young) on that topic?
(I also note, that near as I can tell, the change in the 70s was accomplished via executive fiat, and the 'revered' writings in their voluminous paperwork remains unchanged. It occurs to me, should social mores change back, it might be rather easy to reverse a 'mistaken' decree, than to chip off the correcting fluid in the BoM to put things back they way they were)
(I'm implying that should the need arise, the LDS hierarchy has left an escape route to revert back to their racist teachings, should membership or financial concerns arise sufficient to make the change back attractive)
