Are all Church Teachings Malleable?

[Moksha]

It’s more or less a mixed bag. You might find a book you’re interested in. An active and believing member of the church would also find a book they might be interested in.
Regards,
MG

So both gaslighting and non-gaslighting books, eh?

[I Have Questions]

Assuming you’ve actually read it. What are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling?

You haven’t read the book (apparently) and yet you are making a judgement call that it is not approved by “the church”.

I’ve done no such thing. I’ve asked you if it’s a church approved source, and you’ve ducked and dodged and waffled and babbled, but haven’t answered that specific question yet. Why would I waste time reading a book about what some unauthorised hobbyist thinks?

[I Have Questions]

Assuming you’ve actually read it. What are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling?

You haven’t read the book (apparently) and yet you are making a judgement call that it is not approved by “the church”.

By the way, there are books that are not approved by the church in the sense that they have had someone in authority write a forward, promote it, etc.

I’m not sure where you’re even coming from on all this.

Read the book first. There are times, IHQ, when I honestly ask myself whether or not you’re even within the realm of being ‘well read’.

Regards,
MG

Tell me what are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling? I’m not going to read a book on the recommendation of someone who I strongly suspect hasn’t read it himself.

[MG 2.0]

You haven’t read the book (apparently) and yet you are making a judgement call that it is not approved by “the church”.

I’ve done no such thing. I’ve asked you if it’s a church approved source, and you’ve ducked and dodged and waffled and babbled, but haven’t answered that specific question yet. Why would I waste time reading a book about what some unauthorised hobbyist thinks?

Just what I’ve thought and I’ve already brought to the reader’s attention. You are not as well read as you might like others to think you are.

I’ve come across this before. Critics, such as yourself, that are unwilling and/or unable to think outside of the box. Or even considering doing so. Black and white fundamentalist thinkers unable or unwilling to take a deep dive beyond the superficial level.

The gospel is deep and wide albeit also very simple. First principles.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... l?lang=eng

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I’m not going to read a book on the recommendation of someone who I strongly suspect hasn’t read it himself.

I’m beginning to think that you don’t read anything beyond time wasting stuff such as:

* Closer
* Bella
* OK!
* HELLO!
* US Weekly
* Majesty Magazine

Before you left the church my guess is that you actually did restrict yourself to ‘the basics’ (which are what we ought to continually study). Then when you came across issues that troubled you, you went straight to sources that led away from faith rather than toward faith and became ‘converted’.

Certain websites became your focus to the exclusion of others. Believe it or not, I know how that can happen. I went down that rabbit hole for a number of years.

Am I very far off?

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

You haven’t read the book (apparently) and yet you are making a judgement call that it is not approved by “the church”.

By the way, there are books that are not approved by the church in the sense that they have had someone in authority write a forward, promote it, etc.

I’m not sure where you’re even coming from on all this.

Read the book first. There are times, IHQ, when I honestly ask myself whether or not you’re even within the realm of being ‘well read’.

Regards,
MG

Tell me what are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling? I’m not going to read a book on the recommendation of someone who I strongly suspect hasn’t read it himself.

Bump

[MG 2.0]

I’m not going to read a book on the recommendation of someone who I strongly suspect hasn’t read it himself.

I’m beginning to think that you don’t read anything beyond time wasting stuff such as:

* Closer
* Bella
* OK!
* HELLO!
* US Weekly
* Majesty Magazine

Before you left the church my guess is that you actually did restrict yourself to ‘the basics’ (which are what we ought to continually study). Then when you came across issues that troubled you, you went straight to sources that led away from faith rather than toward faith and became ‘converted’.

Certain websites became your focus to the exclusion of others. Believe it or not, I know how that can happen. I went down that rabbit hole for a number of years.

Am I very far off?

Regards,
MG

*bump

[I Have Questions]

I’m beginning to think that you don’t read anything beyond time wasting stuff such as:

* Closer
* Bella
* OK!
* HELLO!
* US Weekly
* Majesty Magazine

Before you left the church my guess is that you actually did restrict yourself to ‘the basics’ (which are what we ought to continually study). Then when you came across issues that troubled you, you went straight to sources that led away from faith rather than toward faith and became ‘converted’.

Certain websites became your focus to the exclusion of others. Believe it or not, I know how that can happen. I went down that rabbit hole for a number of years.

Am I very far off?

Regards,
MG

*bump

Im not going to respond to your childish comments unless or until you telll me what are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling? You need to demonstrate you’ve read it and comprehended it before anyone is going to take your book recommendation seriously.

[MG 2.0]

*bump

Im not going to respond to your childish comments unless or until you telll me what are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling? You need to demonstrate you’ve read it and comprehended it before anyone is going to take your book recommendation seriously.

I read it when it first came off the press. In my original post on this thread I posted a comment someone else made on the book which parallels mine.

The primary thesis of the book is presented in the opening chapter: theology is a divine-human enterprise. The author clearly demonstrates that the human portion of this enterprise is often underestimated. All of the basic doctrines of the LDS Church are presented and dissected in the chapters that follow showing the non-linear nature of LDS doctrinal development. The book is captivating as it unravels the common (though unofficial) Mormon belief in scriptural inerrancy and uniformity. The author's research is presented with the gentle melody of studious thought from the mind of an actively involved LDS church member. However, the results of his analysis topple many of the traditional LDS perceptions of doctrine.

You won’t read it. It topples your black and white fundamentalist worldview.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

Im not going to respond to your childish comments unless or until you telll me what are some of the specific things within it that you find compelling? You need to demonstrate you’ve read it and comprehended it before anyone is going to take your book recommendation seriously.

I read it when it first came off the press. In my original post on this thread I posted a comment someone else made on the book which parallels mine.

The primary thesis of the book is presented in the opening chapter: theology is a divine-human enterprise. The author clearly demonstrates that the human portion of this enterprise is often underestimated. All of the basic doctrines of the LDS Church are presented and dissected in the chapters that follow showing the non-linear nature of LDS doctrinal development. The book is captivating as it unravels the common (though unofficial) Mormon belief in scriptural inerrancy and uniformity. The author's research is presented with the gentle melody of studious thought from the mind of an actively involved LDS church member. However, the results of his analysis topple many of the traditional LDS perceptions of doctrine.

You won’t read it. It topples your black and white fundamentalist worldview.

Regards,
MG

You copy/pasted an Amazon review.

If you want people to take your recommendations seriously you’ve got to provide more evidence of your understanding of your own reference than a cheap trick like that.