When, in the years following the King Follet Discourse, has eternal progression not been a central tenant of Mormonism, besides when Hinckley said it wasn't (or might not be) back in 1997? I know, I know, this topic has been run into the ground, but, hey, it's a classic moment of doubting a prophet and Mormon doctrine. I think everyone was taken aback when they read the interview.
I think it's a wonderful example of Hassan's distinction between insider and outsider doctrines. No casting pearls before swine. No milk before meat. No freaking out Christian America before getting them to respect our beliefs a bit.
Isn't that a little dishonest? Isn't it a little disconcerting to be lead by men who are okay with deception and denial? How do we feel about justifying that behavior for the sake of maintaining faith in those leaders?