Making Covenants

[IHAQ]

I apologize.

Regards,
MG

There, that wasn't so hard, was it?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

… except for the fact that they have some degree of either hate or abhorrence towards the LDS Church and/or it’s leaders.

Who knew people didn’t like liars, child rapists, and those who provide cover for both?

- Doc

[MG 2.0]

I apologize.

Regards,
MG

There, that wasn't so hard, was it?

Umm…nope.

Next time, don’t make something out of nothing and waste my time.

Contribute to the conversation rather than trying to knock things down and make a mess.

Thanks,
MG

[IHAQ]

I’ve been reading a book by Kerry Muhlestein whom many of you are probably familiar with. In this book he lays out the importance of making covenants with God.

Clearly, everyone is a child of God

As runewell points out, that's an incorrect assertion by Mulestain.

Speaking from a Christian point of view that is an incorrect assumption, using two verses from the book of John:
John 1:12 says "Yet to all who did receive him [Jesus], to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."
John 8:38 says "You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires"

Having been born into sin our father is the devil, not God, and it requires faith in Jesus to become a child of God.

Unless he's differentiating Mormons from Christians...

[IHAQ]

… except for the fact that they have some degree of either hate or abhorrence towards the LDS Church and/or it’s leaders.

Who knew people didn’t like liars, child rapists, and those who provide cover for both?

- Doc

It's hard to admire a group who behaved nefariously enough consistently over a 20 year period to warrant an SEC fine, whilst simultaneously screening members for temple admittance on the members being honest in their dealings...

The next time a member is questioned about how well they are keeping their covenants they need only say "I'm keeping them better than the Prophet is."

[MG 2.0]

I’ve been reading a book by Kerry Muhlestein whom many of you are probably familiar with. In this book he lays out the importance of making covenants with God.

As runewell points out, that's an incorrect assertion by Mulestain.

Speaking from a Christian point of view that is an incorrect assumption, using two verses from the book of John:
John 1:12 says "Yet to all who did receive him [Jesus], to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God."
John 8:38 says "You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires"

Having been born into sin our father is the devil, not God, and it requires faith in Jesus to become a child of God.

Unless he's differentiating Mormons from Christians...

I declined the scripture chase/exegesis because once one goes down that road one can prove almost any point they want to make by using scriptures in isolation without looking at fuller context spread throughout the scriptures. Apparently you support that view.

Looking at fuller scriptural context as a Latter-Day Saint provides additional knowledge that we are ALL children of God. We are His offspring. Those that then chose the devil and his ways become children of the devil, in a sense, just as those who choose Jesus Christ and make covenants with Him become His sheep/children/sons/daughters, in a sense.

For me it simply makes sense that we are all children of a loving Father.

I didn’t want to argue that with runewell. It wouldn’t accomplish anything useful. He/she is a Christian and has come to Jesus. Why would I start an argument or confrontation with him/her? If he/she wants to learn more about the teachings of the CofJCofLDS that information is readily available. I don’t see any purpose in creating a confrontation that is not even necessary with a fellow brother/sister in Christ even if we may have different views concerning doctrine.

Maybe you wanted runewell and me to get into some kind of confrontation?

Sorry to disappoint if that was what you wanted.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

By the way, IHAQ, thank you for making a small effort to add to the conversation topic of the thread.

Regards,
MG

[IHAQ]

I declined the scripture chase/exegesis because once one goes down that road one can prove almost any point they want to make by using scriptures in isolation without looking at fuller context spread throughout the scriptures. Apparently you support that view.

Looking at fuller scriptural context as a Latter-Day Saint provides additional knowledge that we are ALL children of God. We are His offspring. Those that then chose the devil and his ways become children of the devil, in a sense, just as those who choose Jesus Christ and make covenants with Him become His sheep/children/sons/daughters, in a sense.

Which scriptures are you using to support that "fuller context"?
You're also confirming that Mormons aren't Christians, in that Mormons fundamentally disagree on the material matter of who is, and who isn't, a child of God. At least that's clear.

For me it simply makes sense that we are all children of a loving Father.

The people of Ukraine might disagree. Where is God's side of the bargain for those Ukranian members who have entered into them?

I didn’t want to argue that with runewell. It wouldn’t accomplish anything useful. He/she is a Christian and has come to Jesus. Why would I start an argument or confrontation with him/her? If he/she wants to learn more about the teachings of the CofJCofLDS that information is readily available. I don’t see any purpose in creating a confrontation that is not even necessary with a fellow brother/sister in Christ even if we may have different views concerning doctrine.

You've repeated an assertion that runewell has pointed out isn't supported by scripture. It's your thread, it's a discussion, runewell has made a good faith contribution to that discussion, so you are duty bound to enter in to responding to that properly. Unless you're not acting in good faith? Unless you're running away from the discussion...again?

[IHAQ]

I’m learning a lot about covenants and covenant keeping that I haven’t ever really thought about before.

Please give the board 3 examples of things you have learnt about covenants from Mulestain's book that you haven't really thought about before.

Can you also quote something from the book in support of those 3 examples that isn't included within the free sample content that Amazon provides?

Alternatively, just admit you haven't read the book and are just spamming the board...

Thanks in advance.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

MG luxuriates in a flawed epistemology, which for him is nothing more than an endless special pleading argument - that his beliefs are special in the sense that they can't be challenged by conventional logic and reasoning. Obviously feelings are not a reliable pathway to truth, but he uses them to codify his cognitive bias as truth. It’s probably the worst epistemology you can have.

How else can one believe in iStones, the ridiculous Book of Abraham, a church that covers for known child rapists, endless contradictions, obvious financial fraud committed by ‘apostles’ and the First Presidency, the denial of Christ’s atonement to children, the bartering of girls and women - the former being married off to crusty old men as young teens, the use of black slaves as tithing, anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, and literally hundreds of problematic proclamations, policies, and procedures. The Mormon cult is not just a fraud, but it’s an obvious fraud.

Making covenants.

What a stupid thing to even say. What an even more stupid thing to say when you know the Mormon cult is a sham; not even the leadership cares about the rules.

Covenants. -_-

And yet, the shill just spams away. Week after week, despite the master classes that have been afforded him here. He doesn’t read. He doesn’t care. He just blithely scrolls past posts, and repeats himself like the dumb damned muppet he is.

- Doc