DiscussMormonism.com

grindael wrote:...you don't understand the basics ...

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:

grindael wrote:...you don't understand the basics ...

Regards,
MG

Thanks, you made my point.

mentalgymnast wrote:

grindael wrote:
I doubt you can.

Can't see the forest for the trees:
"someone who is too involved in the details of a problem to look at the situation as a whole"

I kinda had you in mind.

Regards,
MG

I'm sure. Too bad what you write shows that that conjecture is not based in any kind of reality. The fact that you didn't understand my reply is just icing on the cake.

mentalgymnast wrote:The only way I can 'get this right' from a faithful standpoint is that God isn't as concerned as much about the time that it takes as He is that eventually things get done. That way we can say that the church is 'true', all of it, knowing that the blips that come along the way through human involvement don't negate the overall mission/truth of the church and what it's meant to do in the world...and the next.

Regards,
MG

Mormon God is absolutely concerned about the time it takes. How many General Conferences have you heard that the time is far spent, it's the latter days, don't procrastinate your repentence, get to the temple people are waiting, hastening the work of salvation etc. yet here you are with the only way to twist "The Church is true" is to now portray God as someone who isn't in a rush.

What a convoluted mess.

grindael wrote:[

Thanks, you made my point.

Point taken and given. by the way, I'm not out to score points. If I'm misconstruing/misinterpreting something, I'd like to know. Thing is, I'm not willing to submit anyone else as being the end all/final word...including you. But...I do value your opinion. And I love your sources. I'm still curious as to "the basics" that from your vantage point you see me lacking. I'm willing to give you the benefit of a doubt that you DO understand "the basics". For that reason I'm able to at least look at and listen to what you have to say as possibly having some merit. Although, I do question whether or not once a person reaches a certain point on a journey of faith that has resulted in a dogmatic/entrenched doubt in the restoration story, whether they would be able to see the forest for the trees. At that point I picture it as a horse with blinders on. Very little peripheral vision at that point.

Is that you?

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:Although, I do question whether or not once a person reaches a certain point on a journey of faith that has resulted in a dogmatic/entrenched doubt belief in the restoration story, whether they would be able to see the forest for the trees. At that point I picture it as a horse with blinders on. Very little peripheral vision at that point.

Is that you?

Regards,
MG

Is that you, perhaps?

mentalgymnast wrote:Thing is, I'm not willing to submit anyone else as being the end all/final word...including you.

You do like to run away after people have caught you on something. Then come back days later and act like nothing happened. Whyme is famous for this. Welcome back though.

I have a question wrote:

mentalgymnast wrote:Although, I do question whether or not once a person reaches a certain point on a journey of faith that has resulted in a dogmatic/entrenched doubt belief in the restoration story, whether they would be able to see the forest for the trees. At that point I picture it as a horse with blinders on. Very little peripheral vision at that point.

Is that you?

Regards,
MG

Is that you, perhaps?

It certainly is MG. He named himself well. At least some of us can say we can change our beliefs based on new information instead of doing Mental gymnastics to maintain what is obviously not true.

Themis wrote:It certainly is MG. He named himself well. At least some of us can say we can change our beliefs based on new information instead of doing Mental gymnastics to maintain what is obviously not true.

I think that he is more of an escapologist than a gymnast.

Themis wrote:

mentalgymnast wrote:Thing is, I'm not willing to submit anyone else as being the end all/final word...including you.

You do like to run away after people have caught you on something. Then come back days later and act like nothing happened. Whyme is famous for this. Welcome back though.

Huh? I've been around for a few days on a few threads. Once they start to go flat I'll usually move on. Or if there is a dead end in which I'm not able to come up with any other ideas, etc. I'm not running away though. That's a mischaracterization. Useful from your POV to score a point or two...but like I said, I'm not out to score points. I see this board as an opportunity to clarify/amplify thoughts and ideas.

What do you mean by "nothing happened"? I don't see it that way, at least for me. I readily admit that I don't WIN a conversation. It's simply a conversation. I take away something useful from almost every back and forth I have. From some folks more than others. Although this kind of dickering back and forth on motive, points, scoring, and judging, etc., is rather unproductive in my view.

Regards,
MG