Flunking the test of faith?

[_RockSlider]

Do you really think your excellence and wealth and making your religion in your own image and after the likeness of the world is going to count for anything when the Lord returns?

My faith is strong in the hope that he is really going to like the mall we built for him and his children.

[_Nightlion]

Do you really think your excellence and wealth and making your religion in your own image and after the likeness of the world is going to count for anything when the Lord returns?

My faith is strong in the hope that he is really going to like the mall we built for him and his children.

Rockslider let me know if you want to buy my book THE VISION OF ALL The APOCALROCK. If you tell me exactly where it is I could swing by your office next time I am on 45th South.

Bumping for Wade. If I get nothing I will start a new thread.

[_Runtu]

The intent of the analogy isn't to argue who may or may not have the truth, nor is it intended to try and convince former members that they are mistaken and should return to the Church. I respect their decisions and wish them well on their new faith journey.

I'd like to believe that.

Rather, what I am attempting is encouragement for some former members to realign their thinking with the conventions of reasoned discourse.

Once again, you are arguing that we are unreasonable and irrational; otherwise, our thinking would already align with the "conventions of reasoned discourse." Do you honestly think such an approach is helpful? Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't intend this as a slam, I can only believe that you are blissfully unaware of the conventions of a polite and respectful discourse.

Specifically, I am hoping to get them to accept the rational notion that faithful members of the Church, and for whom the Church has worked as intended, are in a better postion to know best about their workable faith than those who have lost LDS faith and for whom the LDS faith hasn't worked--and this just as it makes sense for me to consider (which I doe) that they know better than me about their new-found faith and what works for them.

I've never said ex-Mormons know "better than you," but the notion that we flunked the test of faith is unhelpful and seems designed to hurt and offend, nothing more.

In short, it is about common-sensically letting each side have priority in speaking for themselves about their respective beliefs and what works in terms of their beliefs.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Again, assuming that is true, you certainly could have expressed yourself more diplomatically (I'm not sure I you could have expressed it less so).

[Gadianton]

At the risk of compromising the present activity in the Celestial Forum of active LDS, simply by showing up here, I just have to confront Wade, as he well knows I might, about just how his ultimate objective somehow warrants faith.

I have preached online for almost twenty years about the real LDS gospel, only to be cast out of Fair, and its children a dozen times for being incontestably correct yet highly critical of standard LDS notions of gospel applications.

I am no longer a free range LDS reformer. Be that as it may, I would like to see Wade and company squirm or quit the field for the umpteenth time. Aping Christ's example is NOT his gospel. Never has been and never will be and shows no faith at all. What it shows is arrogance and conceited ignorance if not patent indifference to all that Jesus Christ said and commanded. Thus it proves that the LDS who follow this perversion to have absolutely no faith at all. Except the faith in their own way and faith in the expectation to carry off their masquerade skillfully forever. Well, at least in this life.

You are not a Christian if you ignore and trample upon what Christ commanded for his gospel. Come unto Christ as a little child,(with a blank slate, this truly honors the Lord with the appropriate fear and respect due the Great God) in meekness and repent. Take his name upon you with full purpose of heart. Take no thought for your life while you seek FIRST the kingdom of God and his righteousness. Wait for the promise of the Father which is the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. IF it happens THEN you have true faith. If you do not obtain the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost repeat the commandments of Christ until you do them with out hypocrisy.

How long will the Gentiles monkey around with their obligation and commandment to become a Zion people? Do you really think your excellence and wealth and making your religion in your own image and after the likeness of the world is going to count for anything when the Lord returns?

You are entitled to your personal opinion. I just don't share it. This difference between us doesn't make me squirm in the least, but I see no harm in you imagining quixotically that it does. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Hi Runtu,

Perhaps I should have bolded the important qualifier "some former members" so that you wouldn't mistakenly assume that I was necessarily talking about you or even all former believers.

And, perhaps I could have taken greater pains in clarifying that I was only referring to when "some former members" presume to know better than me about my beliefs and about what works in relation to my belief, and this so that you wouldn't think I was making a sweeping comment about all behaviors of all former believers.

Also, I could have stated my point in a less potentially controversial manner.

It is just that having repeatedly made the point in kinder and gentler terms over the many years participating here, though with little or no success in some cases; and given that the telestial forum is flooded with rancor and sarcasm and ridicule (directed mostly at my faith), I though a bit of light-hearted witticism would prove more effective in making my point, particularly in a way that better fits the culture there.

So, you can imagine my surprise when it deeply aggitated people's sensibilities.

But, hopefully now that I have clarified things, and people hopefully better understand my real intent and meaning, the shattered pieces of their lives can now be put together so as to get these good people back to the polite business mocking and criticizing the Church, and bring to an end this relatively insignificant meta-discussion.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Runtu]

Hi Runtu,

Perhaps I should have bolded the important qualifier "some former members" so that you wouldn't mistakenly assume that I was necessarily talking about you or even all former believers.

I didn't assume you were talking about me, but the way you worded it was a pretty broad slam against everyone and anyone who has ever stopped believing in Mormonism. Surely, you recognize that.

And, perhaps I could have taken greater pains in clarifying that I was only referring to when "some former members" presume to know better than me about my beliefs and about what works in relation to my belief, and this so that you wouldn't think I was making a sweeping comment about all behaviors of all former believers.

But you didn't make that qualifier. Who in particular said they knew your faith better than you do? I haven't seen that.

Also, I could have stated my point in a less potentially controversial manner.

Most definitely you could have, but you chose not to.

It is just that having repeatedly made the point in kinder and gentler terms over the many years participating here, though with little or no success in some cases; and given that the telestial forum is flooded with rancor and sarcasm and ridicule (directed mostly at my faith), I though a bit of light-hearted witticism would prove more effective in making my point, particularly in a way that better fits the culture there.

I can't imagine anyone taking that as light-hearted witticism. Sorry.

So, you can imagine my surprise when it deeply aggitated people's sensibilities.

It shouldn't have surprised you, unless you really are that unaware of how such a statement will usually be taken.

But, hopefully now that I have clarified things, and people hopefully better understand my real intent and meaning, the shattered pieces of their lives can now be put together so as to get these good people back to the polite business mocking and criticizing the Church, and bring to an end this relatively insignificant meta-discussion.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

And there you have it. As I said, every single time I try to give you the benefit of the doubt, you come back with a slam, like this last paragraph. Does saying things like that make you feel better?

And whoever is moderating, this last post needs to be moved to the Terrestrial forum, where it belongs.

[_Nightlion]

You are entitled to your personal opinion. I just don't share it. This difference between us doesn't make me squirm in the least, but I see no harm in you imagining quixotically that it does. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Nice dodge. You have learned to trim your passions considerably from you provocations long ago. How is the gospel MY opinion? Can you at least separate between what the gospel is and how I judge the LDS Church?

[_Kishkumen]

I vote that we rename this thread: Wade Englund: Flunking the Test of Civility.

[_MrStakhanovite]

How did this get moved out of the Celestial?

[_Kishkumen]

How did this get moved out of the Celestial?

Wade got too nasty.