# Mormons getting their own planet come Judgement Day? Can someone elaborate on this? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 25, 2012, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mormons-getting-their-own-planet-come-judgement-day-can-someone-elaborate-on-this/635816 "2012-09-25T20:10:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 182
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2012, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mormons-getting-their-own-planet-come-judgement-day-can-someone-elaborate-on-this/635816/182 "2012-10-09T13:49:00Z")
> [@Rhodes](#): > > Yeah, it’s definitely still taught. Just unofficially. I doubt that it’s spelled out clearly in any lesson manuals (although I’ve said that about another topic only to have **Erdosain** prove me wrong) unless Monson is trying to bring it back after all of Hinkley’s efforts to deny it. My LDS friends still believe the doctrine and seem unaware that it’s a taboo topic. It look like I may have been wrong. We had a tread about this a couple of years ago and **dangermom** said it wasn’t being taught at the time, and that she wouldn’t be surprised if _someone_ was making it up. Let’s see, let me try and dig that quote up. > [@LDS theology questions thread](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lds-theology-questions-thread/385140/10): > > It’s not one of those things that we really know very much about. There has been talk about it, and it **has been** taught. If so, it was not during the existence of this universe (at least, so I’m inclined to think), but long before. On the whole, yes, we think so–but it wouldn’t shatter our world to find that **someone got a little carried away with the speculation** , either. However, this is another area where we know so very little that it’s too easy to get into speculation and get all weird. (My bolding) As I pointed out in that thread, the person who would been speculating a little too much would have been [this guy,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith) although it doesn’t surprise me that active Mormons aren’t aware of who taught that concept. > [@](#): > > I don’t care much about Adam-God. It’s blasphemous, but blasphemy isn’t a real sin. I only described it upthread because someone asked. But I confess I enjoy bringing up Blood Atonement. I think it shows that Brigham was a very bad man, and if Brigham was the Mouthpiece of God then his god is also a very bad man. The reason that Young’s teachings on the nature of Adam is fascinating to me is that when I was coming of age in the 70s, the teachings were very much that the prophets knew the truth. Here is [a fairly typical article](https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/08/the-debate-is-over?lang=eng) from that era. > [@N. Eldon Tanner](#): > > It is foolish to suppose that men can be left to their own devices and accomplish what God intended for them. That is just as unreasonable as it would be to leave a newborn babe on its own and expect it to learn to walk and talk and feed and clothe itself without assistance from those responsible for its care and training. A child so neglected and left alone would soon perish. > > So it is with us. Without a knowledge and understanding of the gospel, or God’s plan for his children, we cannot live according to the law which is necessary for our salvation; and therefore, those who neglect their spiritual training or fail to heed the warning voice of the prophets will suffer a spiritual death. > > . . . . > > When the prophet speaks the debate is over. I would have been a junior in high school when that came out. There were repeated messages that the prophets wouldn’t lead people astray. That it required a correct understanding of God’s plan or we were toast on Judgment Day. Then it comes out that Brigham had been teaching a doctrine which later leaders clearly labeled false. How do reconcile this difference? I guess we’ve come a long ways, baby, in that devote members are willing to throw Joseph Smith under the bus to preserve the current leaders’ decision to place conformity with ordinary Christianity over what had been cherished beliefs. > [@Erdosain](#): > > Ha, ha. At least he acknowledges there’s a lot of ugly information to be discovered; he just fails to mention that 95% of it is completely true. “Hey guys, apparently a bunch of you are drawing incorrect conclusions about the church just because you found out Joseph Smith was a confidence man who pretended he could find buried treasure and nailed every woman in sight. Please stop doing this. KTHNXBAI.” _You_ are at fault for having questions. Any time I went to church leaders when I had legitimate questions concerning the inconsistencies in the teachings, the first thing they would do would be to try to make it about me and my “worthiness.” I guess the question of why Joseph Smith was screwing other men’s wives can only be answered if the person who is asking the question isn’t screwing anyone he shouldn’t be. Or even thinking of screwing someone or perhaps watching porn because it may tempt him to want to screw someone. So, we can have prophets of the Lord fuck fourteen-year-olds; pressure married women into marrying him, while sending the husband on missions; and the problem isn’t them, but you? 'm OK. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mormons-getting-their-own-planet-come-judgement-day-can-someone-elaborate-on-this/635816)._