Liars

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Ray A wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Ray
This is where the exmo naïvété is so strong. Think of how many US presidents, too, have been like this. You have an international airport named after a serial adulterer, yet you point the finger at Joseph Smith?


Did the US presidents use God as the reason for their adultery?


For a start, Jersey Girl, I don't believe Joseph Smith "used God as a reason for adultery". But that will have to wait for more explanation, as I'm off to work soon. I only did a post or two in the interim while getting ready for work.


Have a nice shift, sweetie and don't forget the lunch I made you!

;-)
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Ray A wrote:
Jersey Girl wrote:Ray
This is where the exmo naïvété is so strong. Think of how many US presidents, too, have been like this. You have an international airport named after a serial adulterer, yet you point the finger at Joseph Smith?


Did the US presidents use God as the reason for their adultery?


For a start, Jersey Girl, I don't believe Joseph Smith "used God as a reason for adultery".


Then you're living in an alternative reality, because sure as God made little green apples, Joseph used Him as his excuse for adultery.
_Ray A

Post by _Ray A »

harmony wrote:Then you're living in an alternative reality, because sure as God made little green apples, Joseph used Him as his excuse for adultery.


Not according to the people who have studied his life - including non-Mormon Dr. Lawrence Foster, who extensively studied his life. There are far easier ways to commit adultery than founding a Church.

Anyone need a taxi? Sober customers preferred, and generous tips not only welcomed, but strongly encouraged. Off to another night of Psychology 101.
_sailgirl7
_Emeritus
Posts: 140
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:51 pm

Post by _sailgirl7 »

Lying is the cowardly thing to do. People who justify lying use moral relativism and situational ethics to rationalize lying. If you lie to save your own life- is this courage in the face of battle? If you lie to save your reputation- does that breed intregrity? If you lie to confuse others- is that being honest with your fellow man? If you lie to avoid ridicule or punishment- is not this the most cowardly of all? Fearing the arm of flesh instead of fearing God? What ever happened to "Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me." Ps. 23:4
Lying is a tool of convience- to avoid some type of unwanted consequence. Lying is always accompanied by other wrongdoing.

I was taught that satan is the father of all lies. "...yea, even that old serpent, who is the devil, who is the father of all lies..." (2 Nephi 2:18) and "Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell” (2 Ne. 9:34)

Here is a quote from a talk by Marion G. Romney

1. That Satan is the father of lying and inaugurated the practice in this world when in the Garden of Eden he lied to Eve.

2. That God cannot lie.

3. That God hates lying.

4. That liars are classified with major transgressors.

5. That they languish in this world.

6. That all unrepentant liars “shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” (Rev. 21:8.)(Rev. 21:1–8.)

In the twenty-first verse of section 42 of the Doctrine and Covenants, which the Prophet Joseph Smith specified to be the law of the Church, it is written:

“Thou shalt not lie; he that lieth and will not repent shall be cast out”—meaning, of course, excommunicated from the Church. [D&C 42:21]
-"We Believe in Being Honest” President Marion G. Romney

If indeed God hates lying and punishes liars so severely- would we not expect Him to be bound by His word? Or would we expect Him to have allowance for it?

"We cannot be less than honest, we cannot be less than true, we cannot be less than virtuous if we are to keep sacred the trust given us. " "Those who are living the principle of honesty know that the Lord does bless them. Theirs is the precious right to hold their heads in the sunlight of truth, unashamed before any man. "Brothers and sisters, the Lord requires his people to be honest. May we desire with all our hearts to be honest in all our relationships and in all the things that we do. God will help us if we seek the strength that comes from him. "-We Believe in Being Honest
By President Gordon B. Hinckley

I don't believe that one can "lie for the Lord" without violating God's own commandments. Why would God sanctify a man who uses a tool of satan- i.e. lying- to further His work? Does the father of all lies have a hand in the work?- Did he help it along? Was there not an alternative?

Is not the gospel supposed to be pure? Not the philosophies of man mingled with scripture? If truth is truth than it will always be so- and time cannot right a wrong.

Just my two cents-
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Not the philosophies of man mingled with scripture?


It depends on whether or not one is speaking as a prophet or a man.

I seem to be slipping back down into sarcastic "anti" hell.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_KimberlyAnn
_Emeritus
Posts: 3171
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:03 pm

Post by _KimberlyAnn »

Ray A wrote:
harmony wrote:Then you're living in an alternative reality, because sure as God made little green apples, Joseph used Him as his excuse for adultery.


Not according to the people who have studied his life - including non-Mormon Dr. Lawrence Foster, who extensively studied his life. There are far easier ways to commit adultery than founding a Church.

Anyone need a taxi? Sober customers preferred, and generous tips not only welcomed, but strongly encouraged. Off to another night of Psychology 101.


Have a good and safe evening at work, Ray.

KA
_Chad (Swedeboy) Spjut
_Emeritus
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 4:34 am

some of my own "black and white" thinking to add t

Post by _Chad (Swedeboy) Spjut »

What I see from several posters in this thread, is that for some reason it is not acceptable to call Smith a deceiver. He was just a man, a flawed man who just so happened to be a prophet. Did the man lie? Yes. There are many proofs of his deceptions, from polygny, his so called 'revealed scripture', to the many contradictions in his doctrines and explanations of such over time, and many, many more. So then the believer will then argue: "Well people really liked him. He was down right lovable." Does that make him an honest man? Many who deceive are quite affable, and fun to be around, but that does not mean that they can be trusted.

Conmen prey on the better natures of their dupes as well as the baser natures for others. The struggle that all of us have to deal with is the fact that we were once so duped. Then the real honesty can begin as we examine ourselves and make the change for truth and reality over deception and self delusion. I did not want Mormonism to be untrue, I did not want to see what I could clearly see before me. I did not want to accept that I had been lied to and that my Mormon paradigm was incorrect. I had a great deal vested in keeping myself in the position of being right. Truth took a backseat in my list of priorities, which ultimately must be if the believer is to remain ensconced within the dream of Mormonism.

Was there a world wide flood? If not then Smith lied. Does the sun receive it's light from Kolob? No? Well then Smith lied. Were the ancient Americans actually of Hebrew origin? No? Then Smith lied. Is the Hill Cumorah in upstate New York the site of the demise of two pre-Columbian civilizations? No? Then Smith lied. It would appear that the truth is cut and dried. Either the claims are real, or they are fraud. It truly is a black and white situation. True or false. The case of plausibility does note work for the literalist belief system of Mormonism.

Mormonism is a religion which makes literal claims, which require empirical proof. Why would God make these claims through his supposed prophet, and yet leave absolutely no way of verifying those claims save for a warm fuzzy and goose pimpled skin? I'm sorry, in the end if the proof is not there, it can not be real. Or does God play tricks? Perhaps the God of Mormonism is actually Loki of Norse god fame? Hmmmmm.

Damn me for wanting to be told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But I guess it’s that black and white thinking getting in the way again.
Überzeugungen sind oft die gefährlichsten Feinde der Wahrheit.
- Friedrich Nietzsche

[Certainty (that one is correct) is often the most dangerous enemy of the truth.]
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Hi Chad, an excellent post! Welcome to the site!

Harmony, yes, i get your point. OTOH, misinfo is not a good base from which to build, IF/WHEN the builder, whether in ignorance or disception, passes the misinfo on as truth... Ya know what i'm sayin'? OTOH, how many REALLY care, as long as they have their daily-bread? Or, weekly-golf? Warm regards, Roger
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: some of my own "black and white" thinking to a

Post by _harmony »

Chad (Swedeboy) Spjut wrote:Was there a world wide flood? If not then Smith lied. Does the sun receive it's light from Kolob? No? Well then Smith lied. Were the ancient Americans actually of Hebrew origin? No? Then Smith lied. Is the Hill Cumorah in upstate New York the site of the demise of two pre-Columbian civilizations? No? Then Smith lied. It would appear that the truth is cut and dried. Either the claims are real, or they are fraud. It truly is a black and white situation. True or false. The case of plausibility does note work for the literalist belief system of Mormonism.


It's possible Joseph was merely wrong. To lie, the person must know the truth. If Joseph truly thought the flood was worldwide, then he didn't lie; he was merely wrong. If, on the other hand, he knew the flood wasn't worldwide or that there wasn't really a flood, he lied.

When talking intent, the end result isn't the same.
_Some Schmo
_Emeritus
Posts: 15602
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:59 pm

Re: some of my own "black and white" thinking to a

Post by _Some Schmo »

harmony wrote:
Chad (Swedeboy) Spjut wrote:Was there a world wide flood? If not then Smith lied. Does the sun receive it's light from Kolob? No? Well then Smith lied. Were the ancient Americans actually of Hebrew origin? No? Then Smith lied. Is the Hill Cumorah in upstate New York the site of the demise of two pre-Columbian civilizations? No? Then Smith lied. It would appear that the truth is cut and dried. Either the claims are real, or they are fraud. It truly is a black and white situation. True or false. The case of plausibility does note work for the literalist belief system of Mormonism.


It's possible Joseph was merely wrong. To lie, the person must know the truth. If Joseph truly thought the flood was worldwide, then he didn't lie; he was merely wrong. If, on the other hand, he knew the flood wasn't worldwide or that there wasn't really a flood, he lied.

When talking intent, the end result isn't the same.


The path to hell is paved with good intentions, I thought.

But here's the thing... if Joe was who he said he was, he'd know if there was a flood or not. God wouldn't talk to him about circumstances surrounding a flood if one hadn't actually occurred. So, if he didn't know, he lied. It's that simple.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Post Reply