The distance between Christianity and the 4 Gospels

[Res Ipsa]

You could have just stopped at the second sentence…

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

You could have just stopped at the second sentence…

He often does when he gets pinned down. We’re at the flouncing away stage in the MG posting cycle.

- Doc

[Marcus]

Scaling back. That way this echo chamber can be the place that the majority seems to want it to be. I understand.

there's a good example of what our newest member was asking about. You take every opportunity possible to disparage this place where you have participated for YEARS, almost decades. And for well over a decade you've referred to this place as an echo chamber. One would almost suspect you just like the idea of thinking you are disrupting what only you define as an echo chamber.

( And we are nice enough to let you keep thinking that. )

To the recent poster who asked why I have been active at times on this board? To provide a counterbalance/ counterpoint to the prevailing dogma that is represented by the majority.

And of COURSE ideas presented by believers and those that have written extensively as apologists…the links provided…are unwanted. Morley as much as said so.

he did no such thing. And no one thinks your "links" actually present a thought process from you. You google and link because it facilitates your goal of disruption.

So there you are. This will probably be the longest post I’ll post here from here on out. If something is engaging and worth the time, then maybe.

who are you kidding? You make this speech regularly. You'll be back when you need your next fix. : D

[Gadianton]

Morley: Certainly, this overwhelming evidence that this is the PERFECT world for choice is the ultimate proof of intelligent design.

I apologize, I missed MGs unique fine tuning argument the first time around.

Like the barest nudge to the strong force that would collapse the universe to a point, just touching the evidence-for-god knob would manifest God's reality, leaving no room for doubt. And thus, the signature of a designer erased.

[IHAQ]

I’ve read the other posts over the last day or so sent my way. Honestly, I don’t see any reason/point responding to them. In one way or another I’ve expressed my thoughts in regards to the repetitive and frankly uninteresting questions asked. You’ve got to do better than that.

My time is a bit more limited. Especially during Christmas season. I’ve also started working as a substitute teacher out in the local schools. I’ve been spending too much time here going around i circles. I can see why more LDS folks don’t join in the fray.

Round and round we go.

Anyway, I can only take time to engage in what interests me. In this way so can walk away with a feeling that my time was well spent rather than being a complete waste of time. Some of the posts, honestly, are not worth the paper they’re written on, figuratively speaking.

So IHAQ, I’ve been pretty good about responding to your questions over time…but I’m unwilling to respond to some of the silly rejoinders you come back with as I attempt to have a conversation with you. Same with Doc and some others. Lately I’ve been called a moron and been encouraged, more than once by the same person, to go play with my grandkids. As though I was wasting his time.

Yeah.

Scaling back. That way this echo chamber can be the place that the majority seems to want it to be. I understand. If this was an all LDS board and one of you came in to give your point of view, there would be some conflict. I get it.

To the recent poster who asked why I have been active at times on this board? To provide a counterbalance/ counterpoint to the prevailing dogma that is represented by the majority. And OF COURSE that’s not going to go over very well. Arguing for God among staunch atheists/agnostics/secularists?

C’mon.

And of COURSE ideas presented by believers and those that have written extensively as apologists…the links provided…are unwanted. Morley as much as said so.

So there you are. This will probably be the longest post I’ll post here from here on out. If something is engaging and worth the time, then maybe.

Have a good weekend. Merry Christmas.

Regards,
MG

Missing you already…

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

In a timely post on SeN Dr. Louis C. Midgley, who is an apostate and heretic, demonstrates nicely where MG is getting his own doctrines:

Louis Midgley > noel • 20 hours ago • edited

Quite unhappy Noel Hausler is now busy looking some something that will support what I believe were wrong decisions he once made, when he rejected the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. It was once the Reverend Wesley Walters, but that turned out to be a flop. Now we have something from the Westminster Theological Journal that he hopes will demonstrate something. Hausler seems to be fishing, hoping that he has found the proper bait. Put another way, he posts here and perhaps elsewhere to prove to himself that his decision to turn away from God was fully justified

It is true that some Latter-day Saints have wrongly assumed that the flood mentioned in Genesis covered even the highest mountains on earth. But the gospel of Jesus Christ does not in any way depend upon an answer, right or wrong, to that kind of question. Instead, it does depend upon a five hundred page book that has more than survived hostile opinions.

These apologists believe in a religion of their own creation tailored to reflect their worldly faith in scientism, not the restored gosepl revealed by modern-day prophets.

- Doc

[doubtingthomas]

They’re literally still teaching it:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/man ... 8?lang=eng

It’s literal doctrine and LDS kids are being indoctrinated. What’s wrong with you?

- Doc

Here is what I said,

I think mg has a point. The last time a Mormon leader implies a worldwide flood was in 2007 and the last time Noah's flood is mentioned in general conference was in 2010. It is possible some Mormon leaders are slowly trying to abandon Noah's worldwide flood. But I don't really care.

So when was the last time a Mormon leader mentioned a worldwide flood? I couldn't find any recent Mormon statements implying a worldwide flood.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

They’re literally still teaching it:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/man ... 8?lang=eng

It’s literal doctrine and LDS kids are being indoctrinated. What’s wrong with you?

- Doc

Here is what I said,

I think mg has a point. The last time a Mormon leader implies a worldwide flood was in 2007 and the last time Noah's flood is mentioned in general conference was in 2010. It is possible some Mormon leaders are slowly trying to abandon Noah's worldwide flood. But I don't really care.

So when was the last time a Mormon leader mentioned a worldwide flood? I couldn't find any recent Mormon statements implying a worldwide flood.

2020, Shall We Not Go On in So Great a Cause?! M. Russell Ballard mentions “the flood”. 2011, Dare to Stand Alone! Thomas S. Monson stated, “… when the Lord cleansed the earth by flood.”

I used this search tool: https://www.lds-general-conference.org/

- Doc

[doubtingthomas]

2020, Shall We Not Go On in So Great a Cause?! M. Russell Ballard mentions “the flood”. 2011, Dare to Stand Alone! Thomas S. Monson stated, “… when the Lord cleansed the earth by flood.”

I used this search tool: https://www.lds-general-conference.org/

- Doc

Ballard wasn't talking about a worldwide flood, or more specifically about a literal global and worldwide event. So it seems the last time a worldwide flood is implied in general conference was in 2011.

Thank you for lds-general-conference search tool. I can now see the 2010s is the decade when "Noah" is least mentioned in general conference. What a coincidence!

And Mormon leaders are using the Book of Mormon more compared to the past, so some of the 2010s mentions to "Noah" refer to King Noah.

[doubtingthomas]

slowly trying to abandon <> refuting

not mentioning <> refuting

lack of courage to take a stand <> refuting

I am not sure what you mean, but the last time a worldwide flood is referenced in general conference was in 2011. Of course Mormon leaders don't have the balls to take a stand.