M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _moksha »

My dear brethren of the priesthood, my beloved fellow disciples of the gentle Christ, should we not hold ourselves to a higher standard? As priesthood bearers, we must realize that all of God’s children wear the same jersey. Our team is the brotherhood of man. This mortal life is our playing field. Our goal is to learn to love God and to extend that same love toward our fellowman. We are here to live according to His law and establish the kingdom of God. We are here to build, uplift, treat fairly, and encourage all of Heavenly Father’s children.


If ever I was to teach a lesson in Priesthood Meeting, I would want to add the above quote. Thank you Mercyngrace. Thanks also for your consideration of others on this board. The desire of some to demonize us may be strong, but the will of Christ to give love is even stronger.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _why me »

moksha wrote:
My dear brethren of the priesthood, my beloved fellow disciples of the gentle Christ, should we not hold ourselves to a higher standard? As priesthood bearers, we must realize that all of God’s children wear the same jersey. Our team is the brotherhood of man. This mortal life is our playing field. Our goal is to learn to love God and to extend that same love toward our fellowman. We are here to live according to His law and establish the kingdom of God. We are here to build, uplift, treat fairly, and encourage all of Heavenly Father’s children.


If ever I was to teach a lesson in Priesthood Meeting, I would want to add the above quote. Thank you Mercyngrace. Thanks also for your consideration of others on this board. The desire of some to demonize us may be strong, but the will of Christ to give love is even stronger.


It almost wants to make me be a critic. As a critic I can lower my standards to an ape and bash others without the worry of having mercyngrace lecturing me about standards.

It would be nice if critics did follow that quotation. Right?
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_RayAgostini

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _RayAgostini »

mercyngrace wrote:Rambling. Sorry. I'm not good at receiving compliments and you've all been more nice than I deserve.

Thanks again,
MnG


Just don't defend Mormonism here. As soon as you do, the niceness will turn to nastiness.
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _why me »

Tator wrote:
why me wrote:Also, she doesn't seem to walk the walk.



Hey why me what walk do you walk? Mormon or Catholic? Porn star or pimp for DCP? You straddle so many fences you have to have a bad case of battered balls.

You are the weirdest of the weird.


Was this posted with mercy and grace? I certainly hope that mercyngrace will take you to task for this post. I see no mercy in it nor grace.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _why me »

RayAgostini wrote:
mercyngrace wrote:Rambling. Sorry. I'm not good at receiving compliments and you've all been more nice than I deserve.

Thanks again,
MnG


Just don't defend Mormonism here. As soon as you do, the niceness will turn to nastiness.


Or give a poster a quotation from a GA to counter their argument. But I think that Mercy knows this. She will lecture defenders about standards and ignore the nastiness here from the critics.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_RayAgostini

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _RayAgostini »

why me wrote:
Or give a poster a quotation from a GA to counter their argument. But I think that Mercy knows this. She will lecture defenders about standards and ignore the nastiness here from the critics.


When they turn on her religious beliefs, she might have an awakening.

That's all I have to say for now.
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _Chap »

RayAgostini wrote:
why me wrote:
Or give a poster a quotation from a GA to counter their argument. But I think that Mercy knows this. She will lecture defenders about standards and ignore the nastiness here from the critics.


When they turn on her religious beliefs, she might have an awakening.

That's all I have to say for now.


OK - just to see how it looks:

I believe that, like all religions, the CoJCoLDS is a purely human institution. I do not believe it has any message from a superior power for mankind. The good bits in it are, at least potentially and to a large extent actually, the common property of mankind. The bad bits are in part common to all centrally maintained structures of belief and authority, and partly stem from peculiar historical features of the history of the Mormon church. Like other religions, it has features that seem to any person looking at them for the first time to be quite implausible and even mildly ridiculous, but which are much more easily accepted by people habituated to the church by their parents from their earliest years. As a religion of relatively recent growth, and one that makes major historical claims (a Jewish civilization in the Americas, and so on) the CoJCoLDS is particularly vulnerable to attack based on secular scholarship. Sadly, the determination of some Mormons to defend against all such attacks leads them into argumentative tactics that are hard to see as consistent with intellectual integrity. Further, the reluctance of the church to tell prospective converts the whole truth can look like a deliberate 'bait and switch' game.

But to many ordinary people, Mormonism is the channel through which they try to express the best they know. I have no interest in knocking on their doors to tell them they ought to give it up. However, if anyone turns up here to argue that the Book of Abraham is anything other than a pious fraud or (more charitably) a pious delusion suffered by Joseph Smith, I 'll take them on.

There: now I have attacked M&G's religion. I wonder how upset she will be, Ray?
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
_RayAgostini

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _RayAgostini »

Chap wrote:
OK - just to see how it looks:

I believe that, like all religions, the CoJCoLDS is a purely human institution. I do not believe it has any message from a superior power for mankind. The good bits in it are, at least potentially and to a large extent actually, the common property of mankind. The bad bits are in part common to all centrally maintained structures of belief and authority, and partly stem from peculiar historical features of the history of the Mormon church. Like other religions, it has features that seem to any person looking at them for the first time to be quite implausible and even mildly ridiculous, but which are much more easily accepted by people habituated to the church by their parents from their earliest years. As a religion of relatively recent growth, and one that makes major historical claims (a Jewish civilization in the Americas, and so on) the CoJCoLDS is particularly vulnerable to attack based on secular scholarship. Sadly, the determination of some Mormons to defend against all such attacks leads them into argumentative tactics that are hard to see as consistent with intellectual integrity. Further, the reluctance of the church to tell prospective converts the whole truth can look like a deliberate 'bait and switch' game.


While I have a few problems agreeing with all Blake Ostler has written, perhaps you begin to wonder why such "dullards" (unlike you, Chap?) continue to take Mormonism seriously.

Do enjoy the writings of an influential Mormon writer (if you haven't, already):

Blake Ostler: Complete Works.


Chap wrote:But to many ordinary people, Mormonism is the channel through which they try to express the best they know. I have no interest in knocking on their doors to tell them they ought to give it up. However, if anyone turns up here to argue that the Book of Abraham is anything other than a pious fraud or (more charitably) a pious delusion suffered by Joseph Smith, I 'll take them on.


You don't have to "take me on". As inspiration, I believe the Book of Abraham can stand on its own. Stubborn me. And I don't believe Joseph was a "con man". Far, far from it.
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _Blixa »

RayAgostini wrote:
mercyngrace wrote:Rambling. Sorry. I'm not good at receiving compliments and you've all been more nice than I deserve.

Thanks again,
MnG


Just don't defend Mormonism here. As soon as you do, the niceness will turn to nastiness.


Eh, I feel like I have to say something here Ray. It is true that there are some knee-jerk posters here on all sides of the issues. But there are also people here who can discuss religion (including Mormonism) without personal rancor. And there are also some who might slip up now and then but are trying to keep the personal rancor under control.

I don't think everything on this board can be reduced to either a defense or an attack on Mormonism. My interest in Mormon history is colored by both appreciation and criticism, and while that means what I have to say is far from neutral, it's also not just a one dimensional "for or against" reaction, either.

I think there is a tendency for some self-styled defenders to conflate Mormon leaders with the church itself: thus, criticism of the work of specific individuals is taken as an Adversary-backed assault on The Plan of Happiness. I do think there is something particularly "Mormon" about this, too; it has to do with the nature of the church's institutional structure and the history of how it has handled dissent---itself a fascinating area of study. And of course internet "flame culture" plays a role, as well; that can include everything from banal trolling to highly witty snark.

So don't try to sour M&G on this board. She's needed here.

And don't let your buttons be pushed so easily, Ray. I'll tell you again, the Ignore feature is your friend.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Re: M&G Lays Some Serious Smack Down on Why Me

Post by _Chap »

Actually Ray, it was not so much your reaction that was at issue, but that of M&G. I am simply trying the experiment you suggest:

When they turn on her religious beliefs, she might have an awakening.

That's all I have to say for now.


Will my post provoke 'an awakening', as you suggest it should?
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Post Reply