Runtu wrote: I suspect John McLay gave thousands of lessons and sermons wherein he referred to Jesus Christ. I don't know how you could teach institute and seminary without doing so.
But, in the most important four hours of his life where he claws for his 15 minutes of fame, he does not. Indeed, he says he is an unbeliever.
Yahoo Bot wrote:Actually, I do. Forgive me if I follow Pelagius.
That doesn't make any sense Bot, you need a strong concept of the self, and need to have a self centered (not a bad thing) view of responsbility to jive with Pelagian views of Grace. This whole idea of saying the word "Christ" more than the words "I"and "me" doesn't fit with Mormon nor Pelagian views of regeneration.
Sorry; I part with Augustine here. A Pelagian view of God requires submission of will and obedience. Augustine's does not although he issues completely conflicting views on the subject by demanding adherence to the sacraments. No, Augustine was not a Christian but I fully understand that the victor has rewritten history and he was the victor.
Yahoo Bot wrote:Sorry; I part with Augustine here. A Pelagian view of God requires submission of will and obedience. Augustine's does not although he issues completely conflicting views on the subject by demanding adherence to the sacraments. No, Augustine was not a Christian but I fully understand that the victor has rewritten history and he was the victor.
A Pelagian view is synergism Bot, its cooperation and not just obedience and includes notion of libertarian free will that strains credulity. You can’t really consistently and honestly criticize McLay for using the first person in telling of his own life, while at the same time rejecting original sin and belonging to a church that raises the bar to new heights when it comes to a worldview that is anthro-centric and makes a near fetish out of self-autonomy.
Why not stop fishing for personal short comings? I mean, you want McLay to talk shop about Mormon theology, but you can’t seem to keep consistent on the basics on your own theology, so what do you hope to achieve?
Runtu wrote: I suspect John McLay gave thousands of lessons and sermons wherein he referred to Jesus Christ. I don't know how you could teach institute and seminary without doing so.
But, in the most important four hours of his life where he claws for his 15 minutes of fame, he does not. Indeed, he says he is an unbeliever.
I haven't listened to the broadcast yet, so I am asking a question here.
Did McLay state in the broadcast that he no longer believes in the LDS Church or that he no longer believes in Christ? If his claim is the former, do you feel it is possible for someone to believe in Christ without believing in the LDS Church, or is it your view that they must be one and the same to be legitimate?
MrStakhanovite wrote:A Pelagian view is synergism Bot, its cooperation and not just obedience and includes notion of libertarian free will that strains credulity. You can’t really consistently and honestly criticize McLay for using the first person in telling of his own life, while at the same time rejecting original sin and belonging to a church that raises the bar to new heights when it comes to a worldview that is anthro-centric and makes a near fetish out of self-autonomy.
Why not stop fishing for personal short comings? I mean, you want McLay to talk shop about Mormon theology, but you can’t seem to keep consistent on the basics on your own theology, so what do you hope to achieve?
You're just relying upon Catholic doctrine to marginalize the doctrine of free will.
And, yes, I criticize the McLays for incessantly talking about themselves and their abilities. I guess I could insert my personal opinions about the abilities of people who decide on a CES career, but I won't.
He said he isn't sure he believes in God anymore, let alone Christ.
And she says she believes in a God who is all-inclusive -- Gays (not that there is anything wrong with that), adulterers, unrepentant sinners, what have you.
He said he isn't sure he believes in God anymore, let alone Christ.
And she says she believes in a God who is all-inclusive -- Gays (not that there is anything wrong with that), adulterers, unrepentant sinners, what have you.
So? Liz didn't ask about her. Why do you misrepresent the wife again?
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil... Adrian Beverland