LDS bishopric calls back into McCraney's show!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

bcspace wrote:
It's like shooting fish in a barrel...


How so? The rules for what is and is not doctrine are clearly defined.


I assume you're talking about your little link.

May I ask who wrote that article?
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

I don't plan to reply here again this evening. I'm fast approaching all out sarcasm. Logging off.

I do wish you well, bc.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

How so? The rules for what is and is not doctrine are clearly defined.

I assume you're talking about your little link.

May I ask who wrote that article?


A better question would be "Who published it?".
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

How so? The rules for what is and is not doctrine are clearly defined.

The rules? So when the Prophet delivers a sermon, he's not to be taken seriously? Is that what you're saying, bc?


Are you saying the Church never publishes a prophet's sermon?
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

I don't plan to reply here again this evening. I'm fast approaching all out sarcasm. Logging off.


<sarcastic syllable replacement response deleted> - bc

I do wish you well, bc.


Thank you!
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

bcspace wrote:
How so? The rules for what is and is not doctrine are clearly defined.

I assume you're talking about your little link.

May I ask who wrote that article?


A better question would be "Who published it?".


No, the better question is who wrote it??
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

A better question would be "Who published it?".

No, the better question is who wrote it??


Yet an organization chose to publish it as it's own and that goes directly to the heart of the matter. The Church has clearly defined what is and is not doctrine. Now you have no excuse and, from your pov, neither do we. If you can't accept it, you're just talking past us instead of to us.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

bcspace wrote:
A better question would be "Who published it?".

No, the better question is who wrote it??


Yet an organization chose to publish it as it's own and that goes directly to the heart of the matter. The Church has clearly defined what is and is not doctrine. Now you have no excuse and, from your pov, neither do we. If you can't accept it, you're just talking past us instead of to us.


Except that I really see no clarification in there as to what is doctrine. It's still just as fuzzy as it ever was.
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Post by _Jersey Girl »

What is the date on the article? It's not prior to 1852, is it? If not, it has nothing to do with BY preaching Adam-God.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Post by _Scottie »

bcspace wrote:
A better question would be "Who published it?".

No, the better question is who wrote it??


Yet an organization chose to publish it as it's own and that goes directly to the heart of the matter. The Church has clearly defined what is and is not doctrine. Now you have no excuse and, from your pov, neither do we. If you can't accept it, you're just talking past us instead of to us.


By who's authority did it get published? Does the 1st presidency review and authorize every single piece of literature published in any format? Barring that, some wacko web designer could have decided to take it upon himself to decide what is Mormon doctrine and posted this.

GOOD GREIF!!

I just noticed that this is placed in the COMMENTARY SECTION!!! This is an opinion by some unknown person!!!

Come on BC. This is ANYTHING but authoritative!!!
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
Post Reply