I'll probably be banned from Mormondialogue

[_sock puppet]

jo,

Do you believe that doctrine to be Christ's gospel?

If so, how can 'most active LDS people' be Christlike if they do not concern themselves with the details of doctrine?

If not, are the details of doctrine irrelevant? Irrelevant to what that 'most active LDS people' are then doing?

I wish to respond to this.

If one follows the first two commandments you lead a Christ like life. To love your God and to love your fellow man. If you do this the rest of it comes naturally.

The doctrines of the church (LDS or any other) are way down the list of priorities.

I love scripture and study it often but I refuse to let any scriptural interpretation interfere with the first two commandments. Like when Peter killed a husband and his wife. I reject that as a lesson we should follow, instead I see it as a lesson we should not follow. Peter was a hot head and Christ never said to him kill my sheep. In fact He made of point of saying just the opposite. Blind acceptance of scripture without a weighing it against the top two commandments is an error.

Since those first two principles were never lost to Christianity, then why a 'restoration' that wasn't needed?

[_jo1952]

jo,

Do you believe that doctrine to be Christ's gospel?

Hi Sock Puppet,

Absolutely, yes!

If so, how can 'most active LDS people' be Christlike if they do not concern themselves with the details of doctrine?

Because they are living the Gospel. In other words, they are living their lives the way Jesus did through His example: 1) by loving and serving Father in Jesus' name; and, 2) by loving and serving others.

Best regards,

jo

[_jo1952]

This is what I discovered as well. I expected the folks on MDD to be like the people I knew from my ward. Instead, I found a hostile bunch that were more concerned on who was in their "in" crowd. It is a very snarky group. My eyes were really opened when I became a Mod over there. What I discovered was even more back biting. Many of the established members of that group who thought they were "in" were actually made fun of and simply tolerated.

Wow - so you were a Mod over there? Sounds like you aren't any longer. It's too bad what is happening over there - there is so much potential for a lot more good to be done. We LDS (though some of the MD&D posters might argue with me over what I am about to say) are no better than anybody else. We are just as human and just as susceptible to attachment to the world as everybody else is.

Also, if you criticize the Church in ANY way, and post on both MDD and Shades' board, it is only a matter of time before you are banned from MDD. MDD regularly bans people for what they say here, on another board.

Ouch! I sure didn't like learning that. It doesn't sound very Christlike at all....sigh.

Love,

jo

[_Franktalk]

If those first two commandments are what's important, and I follow them the best I can, then what do I need a religion for?

You do not need religion. Going to church is for fellowship. You can also do more with charity in a group. If you wish to know more you can study with others but at times that is counter productive because of all the confusion in interpretation.

This is not the party line but this is what you get from scripture.

[_jo1952]

If those first two commandments are what's important, and I follow them the best I can, then what do I need a religion for?

Hi Hades,

I would like to offer an answer. The first commandment is to love God with all of your might, mind, and strength. Since this is obviously about God, then it would follow that if you are keeping this commandment, you believe in God. In my mind that would qualify as "religion", at least in a one on one personal relationship with Him. A person doesn't need to be part of an organized religious institution in order to have a personal relationship with God.

Love,

jo

[_jo1952]

One more thing about a Mormon lay. When the man touches a woman with her clothes on, depending on the material, (it should be light cotton) it produces a good sensation on the woman's skin. She becomes excited and sexually heated. The man too shares in the excitement. But again, one must not lose control.

Such was Mormon life in NYC in the 70's.

Hey Stak,

Not sure how we got side-tracked, but thought I would add something here. When my older brother was about to get married in 1969, our Lutheran Pastor told him and his fiance in their required pre-marital interview, that the ONLY sex allowed involving genitalia was the missionary position with the man on top.

Best regards,

jo

(Are we allowed to post things like this on this Board?)

[_Franktalk]

Your mental gymnastics are staggering. Without the need to read between the lines, you attempt to defend the truth claims of Joseph Smith, and after failing, resort to claiming truth will prevail, though you can't use truth to defend it.

I think you have misread me. I do hold that there are scriptures that are inspired of God. And I will describe why I feel that they are and I will also give my interpretation of scripture. But if you have embraced the top two commandments you don't need scripture or church because you have listened to your internal spirit of truth.

I would guess that religion has led more people away from the truth than has driven them to truth. The history of the RCC and others is terrible.

I am sorry that I appear all mixed up to you. I do not hold to the normal types of religious apologetics. I have cast off the world and seek a spirit filled life. This would appear very strange to someone who denies that a spirit exist.

It is not my job to supply you with an argument that will lead you to truth. That task is impossible for me. All I can do is talk about what I see as truth and discuss why I feel that way. I suspect that you find truth in the creation, many do. But that truth is manufactured and is brought into existence as the creation is brought into existence. But that truth ceases to exist when the creation is gone. I seek a truth outside of the creation. A truth that provides the guiding principles of the spirit world which overlay the physical creation. But those embedded in the world think the spirit world does not exist. To them it is foolish ideas of a fool. But since I seek the approval of the Being that placed me here the opinions of the world don't mean much.

[_jo1952]

I have a problem loving god... unless I define god as football, beer and chicken wings or something.

Hi Some Schmo,

Your loving God, who knew you before you got here, made sure football, beer, chicken wings, or something were waiting for you. :-)

Welcome to the board jo. You seem very nice, but I think you're probably cool anyway.

Hahaha....but oh so nice of you to say. Just so you know, I think you're cool as well.

You people have made me feel very special and appreciated and welcomed here. Thank you, thank you!!! You are all awesome!!

Love,

jo - who is quietly reaching for the kleenex box....

[_thews]

Your mental gymnastics are staggering. Without the need to read between the lines, you attempt to defend the truth claims of Joseph Smith, and after failing, resort to claiming truth will prevail, though you can't use truth to defend it.

I think you have misread me. I do hold that there are scriptures that are inspired of God. And I will describe why I feel that they are and I will also give my interpretation of scripture. But if you have embraced the top two commandments you don't need scripture or church because you have listened to your internal spirit of truth.

You're confusing me Frank. You attempted to defend the Book of Abraham here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19774&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=210 before leaving without providing one shred of positive evidence for the Book of Abraham. You continue to assert that the doctrine of Joseph Smith is of God... am I to interpret your stance that the Book of Abraham was inspired scripture?

I would guess that religion has led more people away from the truth than has driven them to truth. The history of the RCC and others is terrible.

What I find ironic in your arguments is that Joseph Smith's truth claims can be proven false, yet you consider them true?

I am sorry that I appear all mixed up to you. I do not hold to the normal types of religious apologetics. I have cast off the world and seek a spirit filled life. This would appear very strange to someone who denies that a spirit exist.

No need to apologize... my beliefs are not mainstream. I'm just trying to figure out how you find "spirit" in the doctrine that was born of occult seer stones placed in a hat. Are you claiming to believe in the occult, or more specifically find "spirit" in doing so?

It is not my job to supply you with an argument that will lead you to truth. That task is impossible for me. All I can do is talk about what I see as truth and discuss why I feel that way. I suspect that you find truth in the creation, many do. But that truth is manufactured and is brought into existence as the creation is brought into existence. But that truth ceases to exist when the creation is gone. I seek a truth outside of the creation. A truth that provides the guiding principles of the spirit world which overlay the physical creation. But those embedded in the world think the spirit world does not exist. To them it is foolish ideas of a fool. But since I seek the approval of the Being that placed me here the opinions of the world don't mean much.

The truth Frank, is found within. Whatever you find truth in, has to be based on the truth. This is why I can't figure you out, because I can't figure out what you find truth in? It's not your job, nor mine, to provide a foundation for why we believe what we do, but in open intellectually honest discussion board intended to discuss our beliefs, I find no issue with backing up why I believe what I do... it doesn't bother me when others disagree. If you don't mind answering the question, do you honestly believe that occult seer stones owned before the supposed golden plates, when placed in a hat by Joseph Smith, can actually produce the doctrine of Jesus Christ?

[_Franktalk]

You're confusing me Frank. You attempted to defend the Book of Abraham here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19774&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=210 before leaving without providing one shred of positive evidence for the Book of Abraham. You continue to assert that the doctrine of Joseph Smith is of God... am I to interpret your stance that the Book of Abraham was inspired scripture? ......

What I attempted to do on that thread was to explain my position about a piece of paper. I find no need to validate or invalidate something that means nothing to me. God has made it very clear that we are to come to Him by faith. I accept that. So some paper from Egypt will not be proof to support my faith. God does not make a paper trail leading to Him.

Why is it that some expect perfection in what a prophet says? Are they not men with the same weaknesses that we have? We are told to test spirits, we are told to check the scriptures to see if something is true. Does this imply that there are problems with everything that comes our way? It sure does. Many read the Old Testament and come away feeling that God is mean and arbitrary. What they don't realize is that punishment given on earth allows mercy in the afterlife. Justice can not be tossed aside. This is why Jesus and the Atonement is so powerful. Justice is served for our sins if we give them to Jesus by faith. He suffered for us. But if we don't have faith then justice has to take place in another form. The easy way is to receive justice here on earth. I don't see why many don't see this. When I read scripture I always place the love of God as my lens that I view scripture through. It does change the way I see scripture and it does change what I take away from scripture as the message.

I think Brigham Young said that he feared that the church would follow the words of the church leaders instead of following the Holy Spirit. This has huge implications. To me it means that the errors of men have and will creep into what the church leaders say and do. I expect this. Many try and place Joseph Smith and others as perfect beings. This is a huge mistake. Each thing they said must be tested and placed in proper order. Just as the Bible contains many stumbling blocks I am sure that the Book of Mormon does the same.

As I read the Book of Mormon I find sections that are narrative and others that are more in line with Isaiah. I found 3 Nephi 20 to be one of these. But other sections do not contain a powerful message. Should I hold all of the Book in equal status? I think not. And since the Bible contains what we should do and what we should not do I look at all scripture to sort out the message. It is an error to assume that we can obtain all truth from scripture.

I will stop here.