Polygamy-Porter wrote:Pah seems to be on a witch hunt.
You mean -- like you and your fellow haters are against Scott Gordon?
I'm afraid you are projecting.
Nice graphics, though.
Regards, Pahoran
Not against Bro Gordon.
Just love watching you all waste your lives defending the demonstrably false. Given Romney's "Mormon moment"(which seems to be bad for LDS Inc), this could be a fun reality TV show. Watching you get your Jesus jammies in a bunch would be a favorite for sure!
New name: Boaz The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
LDSToronto wrote:What evidence shows Everybody Wang Chung is maintaining anonymity to enable his deceptions?
H.
Two things:
1) His claim to be a serving bishop; and 2) His obvious apostasy, which is even more egregious than yours was.
Regards, Pahoran
Don't be silly - bishops can't be apostates.
H.
"Others cannot endure their own littleness unless they can translate it into meaningfulness on the largest possible level." ~ Ernest Becker "Whether you think of it as heavenly or as earthly, if you love life immortality is no consolation for death." ~ Simone de Beauvoir
Chap wrote:I am afraid that I do not share with Pahoran the belief that bishops of the CoJCoLDS are likely to behave more ethically, intelligently and perceptively than anyone else.
Since you are not a member of the LDS Church, I understand your perception. However, I think what Pahoran was pointing out is that those who are called to be Bishop should do their best to behave more ethically and perceptively than anyone else. There is also a certain amount of intelligence that one must possess in order to do well in the calling.
My BIL was a bishop....nuff said.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
I know a bishop who was later discovered to have been a longtime child molester. It's crazy to think that bishops are somehow better or smarter or more moral than other people. They may or may not be.
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS
"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
I know a bishop who was later discovered to have been a longtime child molester. It's crazy to think that bishops are somehow better or smarter or more moral than other people. They may or may not be.
Yes, but no true bishop ....
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
I know a bishop who was later discovered to have been a longtime child molester. It's crazy to think that bishops are somehow better or smarter or more moral than other people. They may or may not be.
Funny that not one of the people in his ward that prayed about whether he or she should sustain this man as 'bishop' got a stupor of thought. All of them got a burning bosom feeling, and called him 'bishop'. But here in this thread we find out he was not a real bishop, a poser, somehow slipped through the fingers of the higher ups that put him in that office.
sock puppet wrote: Funny that not one of the people in his ward that prayed about whether he or she should sustain this man as 'bishop' got a stupor of thought. All of them got a burning bosom feeling, and called him 'bishop'. But here in this thread we find out he was not a real bishop, a poser, somehow slipped through the fingers of the higher ups that put him in that office.
Isn't it marvelous?
Isn't it a wonder?
How often does it happen that someone fails to raise their hand to sustain a proposed bishop? What happens if you indicate that you feel the Spirit is giving you a clear 'no'?
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
sock puppet wrote: Funny that not one of the people in his ward that prayed about whether he or she should sustain this man as 'bishop' got a stupor of thought. All of them got a burning bosom feeling, and called him 'bishop'. But here in this thread we find out he was not a real bishop, a poser, somehow slipped through the fingers of the higher ups that put him in that office.
Isn't it marvelous?
Isn't it a wonder?
How often does it happen that someone fails to raise their hand to sustain a proposed bishop? What happens if you indicate that you feel the Spirit is giving you a clear 'no'?
I find it interesting that these same LDS defenders that take Everybody Wang Chung to task for apologizing for the LDS Church (beyond his scope of authority, beyond his 'jurisdiction' they say) are claiming that he could not be a real, true bishop. But they don't live in his ward. So god couldn't warm their bosom or stupefy their thoughts about the issue. That's outside the realm of such for them. So these very defenders that chafe at an apology by a bishop for the whole LDS Church, have no authority or jurisdiction to assert that this person is not a real, true bishop.
Live by the sword of jurisdiction/authority. Die by that same sword.