How healthy is Boyd K. Packer??

Merry Prankster · **Posted:** Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:49 pm

I know that I am setting myself up for some wise cracks with the title of this thread, but I seriously want to know whether or not that nasty old bugger realistically has a chance of outliving Monson. I can see the scenario playing out as follows. Romney (who I intensely dislike) gets the GOP nomination but he is dogged by the "Mormon" question. Meanwhile, back in the center of the universe -- Salt Lake City -- Thomas Monson suffers the big one while sitting on the crapper and quietly makes his exit and goes to his eternal reward of forever copulating in the CK with all of the widows who he has helped out over the years. Then up steps Uncle Boyd to finally claim the big prize as the new CEO. Being under national microscope, the press will start looking closely at Packer because Romney sustains him as a prophet, seer and revelator. Not being very PR or media saavy and being thoroughly convinced that he is right, Packer doesn't give a damn about how stupid and paranoid he comes across in the national media and the press will have a field day with him. Instead of being a great moment for the church, it turns into a PR disaster with headlines like "Mormon prophet says that God hates gays, intellectuals and women," Mormon prophet promotes lying for the Lord, Mormon prophet says scientists are the tools of Satan for promoting evolution and for claiming that DNA studies do not support the book of Mormon, Mormon church president O.K.s spying on church members, etc. You get the drift.

Any comments, anyone??

M.P.

jbsaxman · **Joined:** Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:53 am **Posts:** 1815

Well, the dude is 87 years old, is 4 years older than Tommy-boy and is clearly in poor health.

If he does miraculously (No, the irony of that statement is not lost on me) survive Tommy-boy, I'd wager it would be for less time than Howard Hunter.

I hope he dies before for the simple reason that I could rub it in the Mo's faces by saying "Oh, looks he did enough damage as just the GA and God realized having him as the leader would be a PR disaster." Or something.

Aspie · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:58 am

I hope the old bastard croaks before he gets the chance to ruin any more lives. There are still some people around who genuinely believe what he says and are potential suicides as a result.

What is this thread doing over here?

notpotable · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:02 am

Aspie wrote:

I hope the old bastard croaks before he gets the chance to ruin any more lives. There are still some people around who genuinely believe what he says and are potential suicides as a result.

What is this thread doing over here?

I have no idea what you're talking about. >.>

Aspie · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:52 am

notpotable wrote:

Aspie wrote:

I hope the old bastard croaks before he gets the chance to ruin any more lives. There are still some people around who genuinely believe what he says and are potential suicides as a result.

What is this thread doing over here?

I have no idea what you're talking about. >.>

You have no idea of Packer's bigotry?

By the way, this thread seems to have moved to the foyer now!

tolworthy · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:38 am

jbsaxman wrote:

I hope he dies before for the simple reason that I could rub it in the Mo's faces by saying "Oh, looks he did enough damage as just the GA and God realized having him as the leader would be a PR disaster."

Good point. I take it you refer to the canonized notes to Official Declaration 1. Plenty of prophets (all of them?) do dubious things and are then called home. It got me thinking...

Wilford Woodruff in Official Declaration 1 wrote:

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place

After reading your post I got thinking about the "removed from my place" that Woodruff speaks of. The context sounds like dying, but in the Bible "remove from a place" nearly always refers to geographic location. The D&C uses the words in the same way. Which is interesting because the intended "place" for Mormon leaders is Jackson County, as stated repeatedly in LDS scripture:

D&C 84 wrote:

1 A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and six elders, as they united their hearts and lifted their voices on high.
2 Yea, the word of the Lord concerning his church, established in the last days for the restoration of his people, as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem.
3 Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith, Jun., and others with whom the Lord was well pleased.
4 Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints, beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation.
5 For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord, and a cloud shall rest upon it, which cloud shall be even the glory of the Lord, which shall fill the house.

I find this interesting because the Utah LDS church has been so apostate for so long (apostasy literally means moving apart) that Packer and company no longer even pay lip service to the original teachings. Removing from their place - giving up the central concept of Zion - is only one element. We are all aware of Packer's attitude to Jesus' teachings on love (Jesus' teachings were mocked by Monson in the latest GC). We recently discussed how Packer has abandoned the "Second Coming soon" message. So that is both parts of the church's name shot down. We know Packer's attitude to education and D&C121 (persuasion, not authority) and everything else that ever inspired hope in the church. I just marvel at how far the church has come that Packer no longer seems out of place.

[/rambling tangent]

notpotable · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:15 pm

Aspie wrote:

notpotable wrote:

Aspie wrote:

I hope the old bastard croaks before he gets the chance to ruin any more lives. There are still some people around who genuinely believe what he says and are potential suicides as a result.

What is this thread doing over here?

I have no idea what you're talking about. >.>

You have no idea of Packer's bigotry?

By the way, this thread seems to have moved to the foyer now!

No, no - I should have only quoted your last line, there. :3

Merry Prankster · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:37 pm

Aspie wrote:

I hope the old bastard croaks before he gets the chance to ruin any more lives. There are still some people around who genuinely believe what he says and are potential suicides as a result.

You raise an excellent point. I forgot that there are actually people who take Packer seriously. When he does die, I imagine that there will be a collective sigh of relief from the COB. Does anybody know whether or not L. Tom Perry is healthy?

Merry Prankster · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:59 pm

tolworthy wrote:

I find this interesting because the Utah LDS church has been so apostate for so long (apostasy literally means moving apart) that Packer and company no longer even pay lip service to the original teachings. Removing from their place - giving up the central concept of Zion - is only one element. We are all aware of Packer's attitude to Jesus' teachings on love (Jesus' teachings were mocked by Monson in the latest GC). We recently discussed how Packer has abandoned the "Second Coming soon" message. So that is both parts of the church's name shot down. We know Packer's attitude to education and D&C121 (persuasion, not authority) and everything else that ever inspired hope in the church. I just marvel at how far the church has come that Packer no longer seems out of place.

Great points! Not only did Monson mock Jesus' teachings, but even worse he mocked John Lennon! Despite his faults, John Lennon always told it like it was. I can't say the same for either Monson or Packer. I don't hear either of these two so-called ambassadors of Christ encouraging us to "give peace a chance" or encouraging brotherly love. In my book, John Lennon's "Imagine" is more prophetic and visionary than anything that has come out of Salt Lake City in the last one hundred years. That is why the Beatles still are more popular than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and always will be. They were relevant, the church wasn't.

M.P.

jahedgpeth · **Joined:** Wed May 28, 2008 11:31 pm **Posts:** 2076

It seems from reading this article that BKP passed out from what I assume was an arrhythmia back in July and had to have a pacemaker put in. The term "pacemaker" can be ambiguous so it's hard to tell the function of the implant and therefore the condition being treated. This from the article:

Quote:

"They installed a pacemaker to keep my heart beating," he said with a wry smile. "I quite like that."

What a strange thing to say for someone about to ride the high holy train straight to celestial glory and no doubt sit at the right hand of Jeesus and Joe Smith. Why do you suppose he would be afraid to die?

For some reason, the thought of BKP with a pacemaker makes me think of this from Star Wars VI:

edit for clarity

Aspie · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:04 pm

Merry Prankster wrote:

tolworthy wrote:

I find this interesting because the Utah LDS church has been so apostate for so long (apostasy literally means moving apart) that Packer and company no longer even pay lip service to the original teachings. Removing from their place - giving up the central concept of Zion - is only one element. We are all aware of Packer's attitude to Jesus' teachings on love (Jesus' teachings were mocked by Monson in the latest GC). We recently discussed how Packer has abandoned the "Second Coming soon" message. So that is both parts of the church's name shot down. We know Packer's attitude to education and D&C121 (persuasion, not authority) and everything else that ever inspired hope in the church. I just marvel at how far the church has come that Packer no longer seems out of place.

Great points! Not only did Monson mock Jesus' teachings, but even worse he mocked John Lennon! Despite his faults, John Lennon always told it like it was. I can't say the same for either Monson or Packer. I don't hear either of these two so-called ambassadors of Christ encouraging us to "give peace a chance" or encouraging brotherly love. In my book, John Lennon's "Imagine" is more prophetic and visionary than anything that has come out of Salt Lake City in the last one hundred years. That is why the Beatles still are more popular than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and always will be. They were relevant, the church wasn't.

M.P.

Of course the Beatles were bigger than God! When did God ever have a hit record?

notpotable · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:32 pm

tolworthy wrote:

We are all aware of Packer's attitude to Jesus' teachings on love (Jesus' teachings were mocked by Monson in the latest GC).

Holy crap.

Quote:

[Monson] then quotes an excerpt from a Wall Street Journal article by British Rabbi Jonathan Sacks:

“In virtually every western society in the 1960s there was a moral revolution; an abandonment of its entire traditional ethic of self-restraint. All you need, sang the Beatles, is ‘love.’ The Judeo-Christian moral code was jettisoned. In its place came: whatever works for you. The Ten Commandments were rewritten as the Ten Creative Suggestions.”

Wait, hold on a minute. Rewind that.

Watch President Monson's delivery of that second sentence, and see how derisively he says the word “love.”

It was delivered in a way meant to get a chuckle from the congregation, and chuckle they did. "All you need is love." How silly. How quaint. Ha ha ha.

But hold on; isn’t the line from that Beatles song simply a rephrasing of the great commandment of Christ? By golly, I think it is.

Matthew tells of a lawyer who tried to trip Jesus up by asking him to pick one commandment as more important than all the others. The idea was to trap Jesus into an admission that all the commandments were not of equal import.

Jesus responded by saying that actually, there are two great commandments, and all of Christianity now recognizes Jesus’ reply as embodying the very core of the gospel itself: We are to love God, and we are to love one another. Upon these two commandments, Jesus declared, hang ALL the law, and All the words of the prophets.

Sounds to me like Jesus was saying something very close to ALL you need is love.

What a vile old douchebag Monson is.

Aspie · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:55 pm

notpotable wrote:

What a vile old douchebag Monson is.

And what a vile old religion any form of xianity is. Let's not forgot that the first commandment is to love GOD (the old bastard who at a whim kills off everybody and every animal on the planet save for eight human beings and one breeding pair in every species and then went on to commit even further atrocities); I fail at the first hurdle there.

Merry Prankster · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:22 pm

Here is a rebuttal to Monson:

Traditional moral values fell apart in the 1960s because these values were used by the Establishment, including just about every LDS church leader, to justify a number of societal evils such as racism, the Vietnam war, cold war hysteria, hate, sexism, rape of the environment, greed, etc. By justifying these evils in the name of morality and in the name of God, the Establishment unwittingly called the existence of God into question along with all the rest of society's morals.

As David Crsoby points out below, the 60s generation was right on civil rights, we were right on peace being better than war, and we were right on love being better than hate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EOGv5XnPtU

Specifically, regarding the LDS Church -- if the church truly followed Jesus it would have been at the forefront of these social justice issues in the 60s. But as we all are painfully aware, the church was and continues to be on wrong side of every social justice issue of the last 60 years. Apparently, God doesn't give a damn about how we treat others so long as we don't spank the monkey or bang our girlfriends or vice versa.

M.P.

Merry Prankster · **Posted:** Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:43 pm

Bill Maher nails what I was trying to get at in my original post on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbblG9rJ5Qs

Mormonism is going to look kooky to the rest of the world if it is closely scrutinized. If Boyd K. Packer is in charge, it is not only going to look kooky but scarry also.

M.P.

Further Light and Knowledge

How healthy is Boyd K. Packer??

Who is online