It could be spun out. Jesus supports "extreme baptism".
Doesn't fit the definition of baptism. Perhaps extreme unction, but that is a Catholic thing.
I find it strange can condemn the use of torture by the like of Saudi Arabia and North Korea, yet find it okay if they are doing it themselves. I seem to remember outrage from the US when the UK government weren't being too nice to the IRA.
Just for clarification, even though I lived through the IRA's attacks on mainland Britain, I in no way condone the use of torture.
Mormons have never pretended to not be "biased"..... The question is is how accurate, objective, balanced, etc. is a persons views and study despite his bias.
I find Mormons to be well accurate, objective, balanced, etc. compared to anti-mormons. We accept truth from where-ever it comes. Anti-mormons have an agenda of destroying the Church and only seeing the negative. Us, we understand the actual context and full facts of some negative, and thus most of the time the negative is not a negative at all, or the anti has created some strawman, such as stating something is doctrine, or proves the Church false when such has never been the LDS standard.
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro
ldsfaqs wrote:Mormons have never pretended to not be "biased"..... The question is is how accurate, objective, balanced, etc. is a persons views and study despite his bias.
Unless it comes to fault within the LDS.....
ldsfaqs wrote:I find Mormons to be well accurate, objective, balanced, etc. compared to anti-Mormons. We accept truth from where-ever it comes. Anti-Mormons have an agenda of destroying the Church and only seeing the negative. Us, we understand the actual context and full facts of some negative, and thus most of the time the negative is not a negative at all, or the anti has created some strawman, such as stating something is doctrine, or proves the Church false when such has never been the LDS standard.
If you don't have a bias, then why not use non-Mormon? Anti shows bias.