rnmomof7 said:
"Who can tell us of the inhabitants of this little planet that shines of an evening called the moon? ...when you inquire about the inhabitants of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain," (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 217).
I think this quote illustrates my point very well. Bygrace claimed that the idea of moonmen was an early LDS doctrine and he falsely cited the book
Mormon Doctrine as support. You apparently come to his defense with this quote from Brigham Young, which doesnt really say what youre hoping to demonstrate. At the time, there was rampant speculation in America and England that the moon was inhabited. Many people believed that it was. Does the fact that a prophet could have a mistaken belief prove that he was not a prophet? (Consider Jacobs belief that what sheep saw while mating determined whether or not cattle were speckled. Gen. 30) Does the fact that some Mormons believed current propaganda demonstrate that Mormonism is false? Of course not, or your premise must be that true Christians may not believe anything that is false. But, back to the quote above: Does Brigham Young say that the moon is inhabited? No he doesnt. The most that can be said is that he says everyone is ignorant of any such inhabitants. Thats because the
context of his statement was
false ideas! I will tell you who the real fanatics are: they are they who adopt false principles and ideas as facts, and try to establish a superstructure upon a false foundation. They are the fanatics; and however ardent and zealous they may be, they may reason or argue on false premises till doomsday, and the result will be false. (Brigham Young, same discourse, first two sentences of the paragraph you quoted.)
Admittedly, he does propose his belief that the sun is inhabited; but note that this is hardly a prophetic or doctrinal statement: I
rather think it is. Of course, such a statement taken out of the larger context of Youngs theology is designed more to shock than illustrate what he actually believed. Does he claim that the sun is inhabited by Quakers or Presbyterians? Humans? No, he asks if there is
any life there. If you were to examine Youngs theology, you would find that he believed that
everything is alive - - even when you die, your body is full of life in the action that causes decay.
"In my Patriarchal blessing, given by the father of Joseph the Prophet, in Kirtland, 1937, I was told that I should preach the gospel to the inhabitants of the sea -- to the inhabitants of the moon, even the planet you can now behold with your eyes," (Vol. 3, pp. 263-264)
Volume 3 of what? Ill save you the trouble. That comes from the recollection of a man named Oliver B. Huntington, recorded more than fifty years after the fact. Fortunately, the LDS Church has kept copies of these blessings, and a little research demonstrates that Huntingtons memory was faulty. His Patriarchal blessing didnt come from Joseph Smith Sr., it came from Huntingtons father, William. Do you think that Mormon doctrine is established by the blessings of individual patriarchs? I can assure you that it is not. Patriarchs have the same freedom to believe in error as anyone else. BTW, the actual quote from Huntingtons blessing given by his father is: Thou shalt have power with God even to translate thyself to Heaven, & preach to the inhabitants of the moon or planets, if it shall be expedient.
I know this is not doctrine but it remains a source of speculation within some in the LDS church
Oh really? Can you give me a name of any active Mormon who really believes that the moon is inhabited? I dont expect you to provide such information because that is the nature of this medium. People make incredibly outrageous statements and when challenged to document the statement all I get is smoke and mirrors. For example, consider Wrigleys claim that he gets a kick out of going to the FARMS site from time to time. It seems they have an 'a-ha' moment everytime some new artifact is found. Only to have it not be what they want it to be.
When I asked for some substance to that claim, I got this:
Well, since it came from an article I read over a year ago, it'll take some work to find the actual article. But the jist of it was how the folks at farms jumped to a conclusion about an arrowhead to prove something from the bom, only to have the arrowhead not to be what farms wanted, and needed, it to be. (Wrigley 8/16/03)
Rather than a specific reference, Im given the gist of an alleged article that appeared somewhere about a year ago. Not only that, it dealt with an arrowhead! Later comments by Wrigley indicate that FARMS was looking for steel arrowheads; but how that could be important to FARMS or related to the Book of Mormon isnt specified. Since steel arrowheads arent mentioned in the Book of Mormon, why would FARMS people be interested in finding them? None of this is explained - - but apparently, the mere reference that FARMS has been thwarted by some imaginary article is enough to once again demonstrate how deluded Mormons are. The irony of this is especially rich because these are the same people who demand proof for the Book of Mormon, yet accept these vacuous claims as if gospel.
Alma
before the and worship my LORD because he is holy and righteous and the light that is in me to shine for the world to see!
