?'s for Kishkumen

[_Kishkumen]

Alma 5:
26 And now behold, I say unto you, my brethren, if ye have experienced a change of heart, and if ye have felt to sing the song of redeeming love, I would ask, can ye feel so now?

One of my all-time favorite scriptures.

[_zeezrom]

I don't know what a critic of the church is. I see no standard definition.

[_marg]

After all, we both know what your answers to those questions would be were you to give them ~_-

in my opinion one doesn't know what Kish believes because he's not openly honest about it. You'll not get a straight forward clear honest answer from him for example with your question on whether he thinks J. Smith was a true prophet selected by God. I don't think you'll even get a clear answer on what he thinks a prophet is.

[_Kishkumen]

After all, we both know what your answers to those questions would be were you to give them ~_-

in my opinion one doesn't know what Kish believes because he's not openly honest about it. You'll not get a straight forward clear honest answer from him for example with your question on whether he thinks J. Smith was a true prophet selected by God. I don't think you'll even get a clear answer on what he thinks a prophet is.

And what purpose does such an affirmation serve? To tell you whose team I am on?

I think that is about all it does at this point. In practical terms, it does little else.

I really don't understand why people feel entitled to such information. I really don't care what you think about those things. And I don't believe you need to know what I think of them.

Do I like the Gators or the Seminoles? The 'Skins or the Cowboys? The Democrats or the Republicans? The Catholics or the Protestants? The naturalists or the supernaturalists? The Athanasians or the Arians? The string theorists or particle theorists?

Which tribe of apes will I choose as my winning team? Who can I hit on the head with impunity?

Will marg approve?

So many questions of great moment.

[_Chap]

...

I really don't understand why people feel entitled to such information. I really don't care what you think about those things. And I don't believe you need to know what I think of them.

....

What questions Kishkumen chooses to answer or not to answer is of course up to him.

Others may, without offending him I hope, suggest that an unwillingness to state what one believes about the status of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, or about the CoCJoLDS does tend to differentiate people somewhat from the normal religio-cultural practices of Mormons, who are, I believe, habituated to stating their views on such things publicly as part of their religious observances. Have I got that right?

[_Kishkumen]

Others may, without offending him I hope, suggest that an unwillingness to state what one believes about the status of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, or about the CoCJoLDS does tend to differentiate people somewhat from the normal religio-cultural practices of Mormons, who are, I believe, habituated to stating their views on such things publicly as part of their religious observances. Have I got that right?

Yes. Of course you do. I know that this is bucking the tradition in a fairly substantive way. That does not offend me. It would only offend me if I didn't mean what I say here. I am LDS. I am on the member roles. I attend an LDS ward on occasion. I care very much about LDS issues. I am not interested in dissuading people from participating in the Church.

There are lots of LDS folks out there who rarely if ever share their "testimony." In my experience, testimony meeting is generally dominated by a few regulars. I would bet that a fair chunk of Mormons almost never share their testimony, and they are not disciplined or ostracized for neglecting to stand up and say, "I know...."

If not intoning affirmations make me more fringe as an LDS person, then I am cool with that. I am not striving to impress others with what a great person I am.

[_Nomomo]

in my opinion one doesn't know what Kish believes because he's not openly honest about it. You'll not get a straight forward clear honest answer from him for example with your question on whether he thinks J. Smith was a true prophet selected by God. I don't think you'll even get a clear answer on what he thinks a prophet is.

And what purpose does such an affirmation serve? To tell you whose team I am on?

I think that is about all it does at this point. In practical terms, it does little else.

I really don't understand why people feel entitled to such information. I really don't care what you think about those things. And I don't believe you need to know what I think of them.

Do I like the Gators or the Seminoles? The 'Skins or the Cowboys? The Democrats or the Republicans? The Catholics or the Protestants? The naturalists or the supernaturalists? The Athanasians or the Arians? The string theorists or particle theorists?

Which tribe of apes will I choose as my winning team? Who can I hit on the head with impunity?

Will marg approve?

So many questions of great moment.

I think it's silly for a person to self identify as LDS when the only part of Mormonism they actually believe is the "be a good person" part. JMO

[_Blixa]

Maybe it isn't one's worthiness and chance of salvation and exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom that is based on the answers to those questions, but one's ability to function as priest officiating on behalf of those outside the temple - all of whom will have the salvation and exaltation eventually offered to them.

Maybe these commandments aren't in the New Testament because they are more comparable to those in the Old Testament book of Leviticus. Could it be that the temple which we have reduced to a wedding mill is actually supposed to be the great symbol of inclusivity, in which the sons of Levi offering sacrifice for the entirety of the human race?

The sooner women are given the priesthood and you are in a position of authority, the sooner I'll "return." That word is in quotes because there are some things in my heart that I've never left...

[_Tobin]

Well, Kishkuman may believe DCP is the anti-christ, or his second cousins brother's twice removed great aunt or something. He does seem to indulge in that topic a great deal. I had the thought they might be related, or knew each other in high school, or there might have been some major slight involved in their past. It's a working hypothesis based on nothing more than a rabbit's foot, wigi board, and hairs from nicole kidman (don't ask) - at this point.

Anyway, whatever Kishkumen may or may not believe, I hope he continues to post since it is often an interesting read. Not that I often agree with him, but of course that isn't a requirement to be interesting.

[_Tobin]

Maybe it isn't one's worthiness and chance of salvation and exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom that is based on the answers to those questions, but one's ability to function as priest officiating on behalf of those outside the temple - all of whom will have the salvation and exaltation eventually offered to them.

Maybe these commandments aren't in the New Testament because they are more comparable to those in the Old Testament book of Leviticus. Could it be that the temple which we have reduced to a wedding mill is actually supposed to be the great symbol of inclusivity, in which the sons of Levi offering sacrifice for the entirety of the human race?

The sooner women are given the priesthood and you are in a position of authority, the sooner I'll "return." That word is in quotes because there are some things in my heart that I've never left...

Women already have the priesthood. They employ it in the temple. The only change required is the policy that forbids them to openly use it outside of the temple such as being called to general leadership positions and so on needs to be removed.