Comments on: Can Women Be Exalted?

By: Why Young Women are Walking Away « Molly Muses . . .

Why Young Women are Walking Away « Molly Muses . . . — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 19:08:04 +0000

[...] Adam handles the business of actually engaging with God, Satan, and serious discussion of doctrine. There is no mention of a Heavenly Mother. I can see my future. If I do everything that I am told, then I will bear children on earth, and [...]

By: Zelophehad’s Daughters | Why Are There No Women At This Party?

Zelophehad’s Daughters | Why Are There No Women At This Party? — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 17:54:21 +0000

[...] the past we’ve discussed the problem of women’s exaltation and role in the next life generally. Let’s look now at the complementary problem: [...]

By: 2008 Niblets: Rock the Vote Here! at Mormon Matters

2008 Niblets: Rock the Vote Here! at Mormon Matters — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:04:43 +0000

[...] Lynnette’s “Can Women be Exalted?” [...]

By: Last Chance for Niblet Nominations at Mormon Matters

Last Chance for Niblet Nominations at Mormon Matters — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 22:04:27 +0000

[...] as a Response” Julie M. Smith “Is There Another Approach” Lynnette’s “Can Women be Exalted?” LDS Philosophers two conflicting Paradigms series Kiskilili’s “Inconclusive [...]

By: Just a Chick

Just a Chick — Tue, 27 May 2008 03:59:47 +0000

It’s obvious Joseph made it all up. God would never exclude anyone.

By: Kaimi

Kaimi — Thu, 01 May 2008 21:39:13 +0000

Alas, K’s statement in #73 is in direct conflict with her prior letter of March 14, 2007 regarding the epistemology of inconsistent prophetic statements. It is with a heavy heart, then, that I abandon my discipleship in Kiskililism and denounce her as a fallen prophetess with no more prophetessic calling; and conclude that I must now turn to the only viable religious alternative, Lynutheranism.

(That is, mere Mormon universalism, as opposed to pagan Mormon universalism.)

By: Kiskilili

Kiskilili — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:25:37 +0000

What about when the conflict is between current statements and current statements? (Or are you arguing that scripture and liturgy are effectively defunct in favor of living oracles?)

Ann, maybe I should start my own religion and be my own prophet. Religious contemplation will then entail a lot of narcissistic navel-gazing about the inconsistency of my own statements.

cchrissyy, my life should have gotten in the way! Yet here I still am blogging when I should be doing Serious Stuff. Signing off for now . . .

By: Ray

Ray — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:11:11 +0000

“I guess I want a religion in which contemplating doctrine and prophetic statements is not viewed as a vice.”

Sounds like Mormonism to me.

Seriously, our doctrine and prophetic statements are anything but consistent; actually, they are all over the map. Contemplating them is half the fun of being a member. All I’m saying is that, when push comes to shove and there’s a conflict between old statements and new statements, I take the new ones as authoritative for me.

(Fwiw, I also believe that the old ones are much more fun, since they speculated much more than our current prophets do. I like that our current ones speculate less in many ways, but I also miss the wild stuff that individual apostles used to say. When you never know what’s going to come out of someone’s mouth, there is a bit of excitement that is fun.)

By: cchrissyy

cchrissyy — Thu, 01 May 2008 18:13:08 +0000

I am just really sorry I didn’t get back for everything from 47 to now. I really wanted to talk this out with everybody, but life got in the way!

By: Ann

Ann — Thu, 01 May 2008 16:55:49 +0000

I guess I want a religion in which contemplating doctrine and prophetic statements is not viewed as a vice.

Good luck with that, K.