What, exactly, is the gospel?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Coggins7 wrote:
Coggins isn't really in a position to answer this question, because he is a poser who doesn't understand the basic principle of repentance. For his elucidation, I offer this from Mormon.org:



So very typical of the exmo world, isn't it? Beastie has simply long ago run out of anything to actually discuss or debate here, and has curled up comfortably into the safe little womb of petty character assassination that is perhaps the defining characteristic of the exmo world, its psychology, and its literature.

How dreary, how boring, and how predictable.


The proof is in the pudding, Loran. Either behave as if you've repented (which of course mean no more name calling, etc), or continue as you are, proof positive that you have no intention of repenting.
_Coggins7
_Emeritus
Posts: 3679
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:25 am

Post by _Coggins7 »

As for how certain of us actually "live" and how this may affect our posting behavior or our real motivations for being here at all, while Jason describes himself as "the anonymous lukewarm fickle fringer NOMer that defends when necessary and criticizes when necessary as well", his actual posting history here, which involves inevitably, whenever duty calls, coming to the staunch defense of Harmony, one of the most inveterate and thoroughly committed apostate subversives (the wolves in sheep's clothing of the New Testament) I have ever encountered personally or in print, is striking.

Jason calls himself "lukewarm", but unceasingly defends others who are unambiguously hostile to the Church in its totality. Interesting.

Perhaps this is why Christ, while calling all to repentance, including the most hostile to his Gospel, he reserves for the lukewarm being spewed out of his mouth. How far are the "lukewarm" from Harmony's brand of thoroughgoing apostasy? Difficult to say, of course, but Jason's use of the term "when necessary" is indicative of a potential answer. At the crux of the matter it remains that Jason, despite the manner in which he appears to pick and choose his criticisms of the Church based upon idiosyncratic preference, has, at a deeper level, reserved the right to take or leave, in principle, anything in the scriptures or taught by the Lord's modern anointed servants as he so wills. In principle then, Jason could eject most of the Gospel, or all of it, at any future time predicated upon his own personal preferences, as they may change or develop.

This is, I imagine, much the same road Harmony and others have followed out of the Church, from lukewarmness to substantial rejection of a larger body of core doctrines to open hostility.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.


- Thomas S. Monson
_Coggins7
_Emeritus
Posts: 3679
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:25 am

Post by _Coggins7 »

The proof is in the pudding, Loran. Either behave as if you've repented (which of course mean no more name calling, etc), or continue as you are, proof positive that you have no intention of repenting.



I don't recall calling a single name, or engaging in a single ad hominem attack since my apology

And, in any case, Harmony, I really don't accept the likes of you as my ethical nanny.

Oh, and one other thing Harmonyl, though I have intentions not to engage in ad Hominem's, if you think that this means I will not call spades spades here and point out the ethical dimensions of other's criticism's of the Church, me, or other defenders of the Church, you should think again. The wicked see the followers of Christ as lambs, and make every effort, as wolves, to treat them accordingly. Jesus told his disciples, however, to also be wise as serpents. Because I try not to personally attack others (which many responses to my apology thread make clear will not be reciprocated, regardless of my own behavior), that should not be taken to mean I will roll over and wag my tail when I and others are attacked and savaged (inducing Joseph Smith or Thomas Monson) by those such as yourself.



Move along...well, you know.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.


- Thomas S. Monson
_Coggins7
_Emeritus
Posts: 3679
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2006 12:25 am

Post by _Coggins7 »

So very typical of the exmo world, isn't it? Beastie has simply long ago run out of anything to actually discuss or debate here, and has curled up comfortably into the safe little womb of petty character assassination that is perhaps the defining characteristic of the exmo world, its psychology, and its literature.



Oh, now I see. OK, I'm on the same sheet of music now. Harmony wants to tag the above evaluation of Beastie's general psychological state, and the posts that I consider evidence of them, to an ad hominem. So, now that I've apologized for, on occasion, calling people names and composing less than laudatory poems or songs about them, it appears to be the case that Harmony and others, now smelling blood, believe they can extend this to mean that I will no longer be allowed, on pain of wagging liberal moral fingers, a defense of any assault on the Church, its leaders, or its culture, or return criticism of the attackers, lest I be accused of sin.

I've encountered this many times before. I'm a sucker and a dope for being a Christian, and when someone calls me a sucker or a dope, and assaults, slanders, and impugns me and my religion, I'm to roll over, spread my legs, bear my entrails, and make nice.

Please keep in mind, I've only apologized for ad hominem attacks on others, not pointed criticism of their ideas or their motivations and methods. Those can still be criticized and taken to task without engaging in ad hominems, and they shall be.

Harmony, in any case, is, in my estimation, in no position to hold court on me. As someone who has, for all intents and purposes, thoroughly left the Church and rejected virtually all of its central truth claims, and yet remains within the Church, under false pretenses with regard to her leaders and fellow members, as a subversive influence upon the susceptible, she should really, really be wagging her finger in another direction.
The face of sin today often wears the mask of tolerance.


- Thomas S. Monson
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

Coggins7 wrote:
You don't seem to live it in the way you post to people here.

Galatians 5:22-23. You are failing Loran. Please repent.




Keep up the pose Jason.

And, for the record, you have not the slightest idea how I "live".



Move alone, nothing to see here...as ever so predictably usual.



Loran

You are correct. I have no idea how you live off this board. Nor do you I. But on this board you do not exhibit the fruits of the spirit nor the testimony you often loudly proclaim. So I will continue to urge you to consider Galatians 5:22-23 and remind you that you are a horrible example of a believing LDS at least on this board. In real life you might be a fine person and a warm and loving man. I hope so.

Best wishes.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Post by _harmony »

Coggins7 wrote:Harmony, in any case, is, in my estimation, in no position to hold court on me. As someone who has, for all intents and purposes, thoroughly left the Church and rejected virtually all of its central truth claims, and yet remains within the Church, under false pretenses with regard to her leaders and fellow members, as a subversive influence upon the susceptible, she should really, really be wagging her finger in another direction.


It makes no difference how many times you assert this, Loran, it has no basis in reality.

My bishop will be released next week. Should I live in fear? Naw. My testimony of the divinity of Jesus Christ and the gospel he taught is as strong as ever; that makes me untouchable.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

As for how certain of us actually "live" and how this may affect our posting behavior or our real motivations for being here at all, while Jason describes himself as "the anonymous lukewarm fickle fringer NOMer that defends when necessary and criticizes when necessary as well", his actual posting history here, which involves inevitably, whenever duty calls, coming to the staunch defense of Harmony, one of the most inveterate and thoroughly committed apostate subversives (the wolves in sheep's clothing of the New Testament) I have ever encountered personally or in print, is striking.



Did you just calll someone out on character assassination and now you are attacking me? Please don't apologize to me again Loran till you mean it. Now, my reference to myseld and the lukewarm NOMer, don't think I said fickler, but I may have, was tongue in cheek. As for Harmony, sometimes I agree with her and take her position. Other times I disagree with her. She can tell you that I have criticized some of her potions here. But I like her online persona and imagine in real life I would like her as well.

Jason calls himself "lukewarm", but unceasingly defends others who are unambiguously hostile to the Church in its totality. Interesting.



Hmm Let me see. I have wrangled, with Scratch, Kimberly, Jersey, Boaz, Merc, Shades and many others when I have perceived their stance unreasonable just as I have with you at times. And I have agrees with you at times as well though your nastiness and strident style makes it tough to do so.

Perhaps this is why Christ, while calling all to repentance, including the most hostile to his Gospel, he reserves for the lukewarm being spewed out of his mouth. How far are the "lukewarm" from Harmony's brand of thoroughgoing apostasy?


Well Jesus and I talk about this quite often. He may spew me someday but he knows I love him and I have tell him quite often to lead me to where he wants me and I will go where ever that may be. I feel by the power of the spirit that most days he and I are on good terms. I talk to him about all this stuff.

Difficult to say, of course, but Jason's use of the term "when necessary" is indicative of a potential answer. At the crux of the matter it remains that Jason, despite the manner in which he appears to pick and choose his criticisms of the Church based upon idiosyncratic preference, has, at a deeper level, reserved the right to take or leave, in principle, anything in the scriptures or taught by the Lord's modern anointed servants as he so wills. In principle then, Jason could eject most of the Gospel, or all of it, at any future time predicated upon his own personal preferences, as they may change or develop.


Well my friend you may be right. But I have not rejected the gospel at all. Some of things I wonder about and question whether they are part of the gospel. Perhaps we define gospel differently. But sure, I may chuck it all someday or go back to being as TBM as anyone. Fortunately for me you are not my judge and the one who is is well aware of where I am at because I talk to him about it a lot, with passion and tears even.
This is, I imagine, much the same road Harmony and others have followed out of the Church, from lukewarmness to substantial rejection of a larger body of core doctrines to open hostility.



I imagine that you best leave Harmony's status to the Judge of men and women and look to the beam in your own eye first. Galatians 5:22-23.
Post Reply