DiscussMormonism.com

Marcus wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 15, 2021 10:26 pm

You say "okay. Obviously the current Chef's position is right, so I will like what the current Chef tells me is currently best. And I will eat nowhere else, and I will tip an extra 10% forever even though the Chef refuses to share it with anyone, and I will also clean all the restaurant bathrooms weekly, for free, because the Chef tells me that's how I can best express my loyalty. "

Then you sit yourself in the front window of the restaurant, choking down your patty-less burger and your charcoal stick fries, and you mock and laugh at all the people walking by who aren't loyal enough to eat what they are told to eat by a changing Chef with no taste.

Brilliant.

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 1:23 am

sock puppet wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 15, 2021 10:10 pm

MG--so what the First Presidency proclaims as doctrine, even a 'direct commandment from the Lord', is not such?

At the end of the day, so to speak, I think we are free agents. Not beholden to anyone or any institution per se. We align ourselves to what we believe is right and good/correct. I think leaders do the same thing. We’re all in the same boat in this respect. A recent poster suggested a ‘slippery slope’ in which members might within reason determine that the resurrection of Jesus didn’t occur. Or that other core doctrines in regards to faith in God, saving ordinances, etc., could become passé or unnecessary. I don’t think that is the case. There is so much we don’t know. There are some things leaders know and other things that they may not have a full understanding of.

My personal credo is that if a letter comes out from the 1st Presidency with their signatures underneath I will give them the benefit of a doubt that they have sought and received the mind and will of the Lord for that time and for a certain purpose. But even then, that’s not saying they have an all encompassing understanding of all the in’s and out’s of the ramifications, etc., that may result from what they are putting out there. There are just too many examples of adjustments to revelations to think otherwise. Conditions change, so does revelation.

When it comes to the Great Flood and the Priesthood Ban and the united front that was maintained by the brethren, I’m of the opinion that they sought the mind and will of God and then did what they did. But they were also subject to the limitations of their own faculties, cultural inhibitions/restraints, etc. How all that meshes together is the million dollar question.

But I believe that over time things tend to work themselves out. And most often they do. That’s the line upon line, precept upon precept I’m referring to. Always clean? No.

Humans are messy creatures.

Regards,
MG

So no, the First Presidency cannot be trusted to accurately portray the mind and will of their Lord even when they explicitly and formally say they are doing so. I know we all knew that, but I’ll bet it feels good to come right out and say it.

Put another way, what you just said was that you can never trust the First Presidency to accurately reflect the mind and the will of your lord. In any setting.

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 1:23 am

My personal credo is that if a letter comes out from the 1st Presidency with their signatures underneath I will give them the benefit of a doubt that they have sought and received the mind and will of the Lord for that time and for a certain purpose. But even then, that’s not saying they have an all encompassing understanding of all the in’s and out’s of the ramifications, etc., that may result from what they are putting out there. There are just too many examples of adjustments to revelations to think otherwise. Conditions change, so does revelation.

When it comes to the Great Flood and the Priesthood Ban and the united front that was maintained by the brethren, I’m of the opinion that they sought the mind and will of God and then did what they did. But they were also subject to the limitations of their own faculties, cultural inhibitions/restraints, etc. How all that meshes together is the million dollar question.

But I believe that over time things tend to work themselves out. And most often they do. That’s the line upon line, precept upon precept I’m referring to. Always clean? No.

Humans are messy creatures.

Absolutely. I'm totally with you, MG. Some day they'll figure it out. It doesn't really matter that parts of it are a fraud or that the fifteen don't actually know what they're doing. Like with that gay stuff--the lives destroyed here or there aren't really that important in the eternal perspective. Milk before meat, precept upon precept, and the lion will lie down with the lamb.

And what's this big noise being made about denying science and institutionalizing racism? Denying science and embracing bigotry are part of our free will. By endorsing these things, the fifteen are allowing us to be human. C'est la vie and stuff.

The whole thing doesn't warrant much more than a French shrug and another round of Stephen's Hot Cocoa™. God will work it out. And if he doesn't, what does it matter? The Church is true.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 5:58 am

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 5:07 am

Granted, the two may look very similar. It’s the “Is God hiding, and if so, why?” question that seems to pop up so frequently.

So easy to slip into the idea of no God. More than one reason to go there.

Regards,
MG

Not similar. Identical. You throw these rationalization around like they are some kind of talismanic get out of jail free card. Nothing in the concept of line upon line includes God either lying to the leaders of his one and only true Church or sitting back and letting them be deceived into thinking they were inspired to present objectively false information as an inspired interpretation of Holy Scripture.

It’s not about God hiding. It’s that you have to throw your God under the bus as a trickster or deceiver in order to defend your religious sect. And you do so quite cheerfully.

Yes, there are many valid reasons not to believe in Mormon God. You’ve just illustrated one of them.

I don’t think one should focus solely on reasons NOT to believe when there are many reasons TO believe. At its core, I believe the CofJCofLDS shares the message and meaning of Christmas and the Resurrection more completely and with greater TRUTH than any other Christian church. The teachings concerning God, the plan of progression, many degrees of heaven, authority of the Priesthood, the mission of Christ and His Atonement, sacrifice and obedience to God’s Law in its totality…the list can go on…are all taught and exemplified more fully in the church.

In my opinion, of course.

The peripheral issues that you and others focus on are ‘clickbait’ for reasons to disbelieve in those things that are of eternal significance.

Again, my opinion.

My belief is that we are provided with a real world of blessings and consequences. Choices are REAL. For the consequences of our choice to have any real meaning those choices have to be built on opposition between competing factors that can be entered into the equation.

That is my belief.

Jacob and Esau were the sons of Isaac and Rebekah and the first twins mentioned in the Bible. Even before they were born, they were struggling together in the womb of their mother. Their prenatal striving foreshadowed later conflict (Genesis 25:21-26).

The twins grew up very different. Jacob was “a quiet man, staying among the tents” and his mother’s favorite. Esau was “a skillful hunter, a man of the open country” and his father’s favorite. One day, Esau returned from hunting and desired some of the lentil stew that Jacob was cooking. Jacob offered to give his brother some stew in exchange for his birthright—the special honor that Esau possessed as the older son, which gave him the right to a double portion of his father’s inheritance. Esau put his temporary, physical needs over his God-given blessing and sold his birthright to Jacob (Genesis 25:27-34).

I see this story from the Old Testament as having direct application to those that have the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel of Jesus Christ. And especially to those of us that were BIC.

Personally, I don’t want to give up my birthright for a mess of pottage.

But that’s just me (and a lot of others).

As I said earlier, we are ALL agents unto ourselves and make choices no matter what our lot in life, except for those that are unable to do so, of course. Our decisions have real consequences. Issues having to do with the flood, evolution, and the like, will have very little impact on our progression and the determination of where we will go and what we will become as we move beyond this veil that we call life.

And yes, again, that is my belief/opinion.

Regards,
MG

IHAQ wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 8:01 am

…you can never trust the First Presidency to accurately reflect the mind and the will of your lord. In any setting.

No. My response to Res Ipsa may help you understand where I am coming from.

Regards,
MG

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 5:56 pm

IHAQ wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 8:01 am

…you can never trust the First Presidency to accurately reflect the mind and the will of your lord. In any setting.

No. My response to Res Ipsa may help you understand where I am coming from.

Regards,
MG

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 5:52 pm

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 5:58 am

Not similar. Identical. You throw these rationalization around like they are some kind of talismanic get out of jail free card. Nothing in the concept of line upon line includes God either lying to the leaders of his one and only true Church or sitting back and letting them be deceived into thinking they were inspired to present objectively false information as an inspired interpretation of Holy Scripture.

It’s not about God hiding. It’s that you have to throw your God under the bus as a trickster or deceiver in order to defend your religious sect. And you do so quite cheerfully.

Yes, there are many valid reasons not to believe in Mormon God. You’ve just illustrated one of them.

I don’t think one should focus solely on reasons NOT to believe when there are many reasons TO believe. At its core, I believe the CofJCofLDS shares the message and meaning of Christmas and the Resurrection more completely and with greater TRUTH than any other Christian church. The teachings concerning God, the plan of progression, many degrees of heaven, authority of the Priesthood, the mission of Christ and His Atonement, sacrifice and obedience to God’s Law in its totality…the list can go on…are all taught and exemplified more fully in the church.

In my opinion, of course.

The peripheral issues that you and others focus on are ‘clickbait’ for reasons to disbelieve in those things that are of eternal significance.

Again, my opinion.

My belief is that we are provided with a real world of blessings and consequences. Choices are REAL. For the consequences of our choice to have any real meaning those choices have to be built on opposition between competing factors that can be entered into the equation.

That is my belief.

Jacob and Esau were the sons of Isaac and Rebekah and the first twins mentioned in the Bible. Even before they were born, they were struggling together in the womb of their mother. Their prenatal striving foreshadowed later conflict (Genesis 25:21-26).

The twins grew up very different. Jacob was “a quiet man, staying among the tents” and his mother’s favorite. Esau was “a skillful hunter, a man of the open country” and his father’s favorite. One day, Esau returned from hunting and desired some of the lentil stew that Jacob was cooking. Jacob offered to give his brother some stew in exchange for his birthright—the special honor that Esau possessed as the older son, which gave him the right to a double portion of his father’s inheritance. Esau put his temporary, physical needs over his God-given blessing and sold his birthright to Jacob (Genesis 25:27-34).

I see this story from the Old Testament as having direct application to those that have the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel of Jesus Christ. And especially to those of us that were BIC.

Personally, I don’t want to give up my birthright for a mess of pottage.

But that’s just me (and a lot of others).

As I said earlier, we are ALL agents unto ourselves and make choices no matter what our lot in life, except for those that are unable to do so, of course. Our decisions have real consequences. Issues having to do with the flood, evolution, and the like, will have very little impact on our progression and the determination of where we will go and what we will become as we move beyond this veil that we call life.

And yes, again, that is my belief/opinion.

Regards,
MG

Well of course your church teaches its own religious doctrine better than any other church does. What else would one expect?

Nothing in your list gives me any reason to believe in any God, let alone your God. Nothing gives me any reason to believe that you have some kind of birthright conditioned on your believe in Mormon God. As far as I can tell, you've got the same pottage I do. Well, you might have 10% less.

Mormonism tells one of a virtually infinite number of stories about life. I understand fully the attractions of the Mormon story –– I accepted it as the truth in the early part of my life. But I haven't accepted it as truth for a long time now, and nothing today gives me any reason to believe otherwise. And your relentless, result-oriented rationalizations simply aren't persuasive. I don't think you understand how off-putting your arguments are to someone who is genuinely interested in truth.

But my main objection to your specific tactics is the ugliness behind the smiley face mask that you present to us. When you start talking about "opposition in all things," those of us familiar with Mormonism know exactly what you are saying: I and my ilk are agents of a malevolent supernatural being. Not only that, your Mormon God needs me to be an agent of a malevolent supernatural being or else his "plan" won't work. What kind of loving creator God intentionally puts a "plan" into motion that necessarily sacrifices the children he supposedly loves? Why in the world would I ever want to worship a God that requires me to view my fellow humans as agents of a malevolent superbeing simply because they don't believe in that God? That's what's behind your smiley face mask, which slips from time to time to reveal the ugliness hiding behind it.

malkie wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 15, 2021 11:41 pm

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Wed Dec 15, 2021 10:28 pm

I think I need a primer on the difference between "line upon line, precept on precept" and "making stuff up as you go along."

This is so good.

- Doc

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑
I don’t think one should focus solely on reasons NOT to believe when there are many reasons TO believe. At its core, I believe the CofJCofLDS shares the message and meaning of Christmas and the Resurrection more completely and with greater TRUTH than any other Christian church. The teachings concerning God, the plan of progression, many degrees of heaven, authority of the Priesthood, the mission of Christ and His Atonement, sacrifice and obedience to God’s Law in its totality…the list can go on…are all taught and exemplified more fully in the church.

In my opinion, of course.

The peripheral issues that you and others focus on are ‘clickbait’ for reasons to disbelieve in those things that are of eternal significance.

Again, my opinion.

My belief is that we are provided with a real world of blessings and consequences. Choices are REAL. For the consequences of our choice to have any real meaning those choices have to be built on opposition between competing factors that can be entered into the equation.

That is my belief.

Jacob and Esau were the sons of Isaac and Rebekah and the first twins mentioned in the Bible. Even before they were born, they were struggling together in the womb of their mother. Their prenatal striving foreshadowed later conflict (Genesis 25:21-26).

The twins grew up very different. Jacob was “a quiet man, staying among the tents” and his mother’s favorite. Esau was “a skillful hunter, a man of the open country” and his father’s favorite. One day, Esau returned from hunting and desired some of the lentil stew that Jacob was cooking. Jacob offered to give his brother some stew in exchange for his birthright—the special honor that Esau possessed as the older son, which gave him the right to a double portion of his father’s inheritance. Esau put his temporary, physical needs over his God-given blessing and sold his birthright to Jacob (Genesis 25:27-34).

I see this story from the Old Testament as having direct application to those that have the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel of Jesus Christ. And especially to those of us that were BIC.

Personally, I don’t want to give up my birthright for a mess of pottage.

But that’s just me (and a lot of others).

As I said earlier, we are ALL agents unto ourselves and make choices no matter what our lot in life, except for those that are unable to do so, of course. Our decisions have real consequences. Issues having to do with the flood, evolution, and the like, will have very little impact on our progression and the determination of where we will go and what we will become as we move beyond this veil that we call life.

And yes, again, that is my belief/opinion.

Regards,
MG

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑ Well of course your church teaches its own religious doctrine better than any other church does. What else would one expect?

And that is your prerogative.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑ Nothing in your list gives me any reason to believe in any God, let alone your God. Nothing gives me any reason to believe that you have some kind of birthright conditioned on your believe in Mormon God. As far as I can tell, you've got the same pottage I do. Well, you might have 10% less.

I realize that this is probably true from your vantage point.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑
Mormonism tells one of a virtually infinite number of stories about life. I understand fully the attractions of the Mormon story –– I accepted it as the truth in the early part of my life. But I haven't accepted it as truth for a long time now, and nothing today gives me any reason to believe otherwise.

I realize that your mileage may vary from that of another. We all see truth through our own lens.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑ But my main objection to your specific tactics is the ugliness behind the smiley face mask that you present to us.

I don’t have any devious tactics, Rep Ipsa. I have no illusions that the gospel message presented by the LDS church is going to be somewhat distasteful and even abhorrent to many folks. There is no “ugliness” behind the smiley face. I am a decent and kind person with no interest in changing anyone else. I do have in interest, however, in counterbalancing views that I see as mistaken and dangerous. I don’t see that has being at odds with that which is just and true.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑
When you start talking about "opposition in all things," those of us familiar with Mormonism know exactly what you are saying: I and my ilk are agents of a malevolent supernatural being. Not only that, your Mormon God needs me to be an agent of a malevolent supernatural being or else his "plan" won't work.

Not at all. Opposition is having to make real choices. There need to be real alternatives. I DO NOT see you or other atheists as being inherently evil. As I mentioned, I do think you are gravely mistaken, and that others ought to give a second thought…and a third…to taking the path of secular humanistic and/or atheistic thought. But at the end of the day, we are all free to choose. But you, an evil and corrupt human being? I would absolutely hope not. In my opinion are you helping or hindering what I believe to be the work of the Lord? Well, the answer to that is rather obvious.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑
What kind of loving creator God intentionally puts a "plan" into motion that necessarily sacrifices the children he supposedly loves? Why in the world would I ever want to worship a God that requires me to view my fellow humans as agents of a malevolent superbeing simply because they don't believe in that God?

Opposition is a necessary part of God’s plan in my estimation, yes. There sure is a LOT of it. I’d like/hope to thing there is some greater meaning/purpose to it.

Those children make choices on their own. God forces no man to heaven, as the saying goes. The choices that His children make, however, do provide the oppositional forces that provide meaning to existence. If everyone did just the right thing or made just the right choices, what kind of world would that be? For one, it wouldn’t be real. No one is perfect. Everyone has their own views. Etc.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑
Why in the world would I ever want to worship a God that requires me to view my fellow humans as agents of a malevolent superbeing simply because they don't believe in that God?

That’s whacko. I’m right with you on that.

But…I think you are mistaken in what I…and others…and God think about folks that are different from ourselves. God has commanded us to love ALL His children. Even those that have left the family of God behind and gone their own way.

Res Ipsa, you are your OWN man. I have absolutely no illusions that I or any other believer behind a smiling face will EVER change that. I do find it interesting, however, that the godless find it necessary to point a finger of derision towards believers and accuse them of worshiping a “malevolent super being”. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

But you’ll stick with that accusation until your dying day, I would suppose.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑
That's what's behind your smiley face mask, which slips from time to time to reveal the ugliness hiding behind it.

And you, sir, are gravely mistaken.

Regards,
MG

Morley wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 3:52 pm

MG 2.0 wrote: ↑

Thu Dec 16, 2021 1:23 am

My personal credo is that if a letter comes out from the 1st Presidency with their signatures underneath I will give them the benefit of a doubt that they have sought and received the mind and will of the Lord for that time and for a certain purpose. But even then, that’s not saying they have an all encompassing understanding of all the in’s and out’s of the ramifications, etc., that may result from what they are putting out there. There are just too many examples of adjustments to revelations to think otherwise. Conditions change, so does revelation.

When it comes to the Great Flood and the Priesthood Ban and the united front that was maintained by the brethren, I’m of the opinion that they sought the mind and will of God and then did what they did. But they were also subject to the limitations of their own faculties, cultural inhibitions/restraints, etc. How all that meshes together is the million dollar question.

But I believe that over time things tend to work themselves out. And most often they do. That’s the line upon line, precept upon precept I’m referring to. Always clean? No.

Humans are messy creatures.

Absolutely. I'm totally with you, MG. Some day they'll figure it out. It doesn't really matter that parts of it are a fraud or that the fifteen don't actually know what they're doing. Like with that gay stuff--the lives destroyed here or there aren't really that important in the eternal perspective. Milk before meat, precept upon precept, and the lion will lie down with the lamb.

And what's this big noise being made about denying science and institutionalizing racism? Denying science and embracing bigotry are part of our free will. By endorsing these things, the fifteen are allowing us to be human. C'est la vie and stuff.

The whole thing doesn't warrant much more than a French shrug and another round of Stephen's Hot Cocoa™. God will work it out. And if he doesn't, what does it matter? The Church is true.

I think you’ve got it right. God will work it out. The church is true.

Enjoy the cocoa.

By the way, which church or belief system do you think gets/has it right with God? Assuming that God is God and no other.

Regards,
MG