MG will post absolutely anything that he thinks supports his religion, regardless of how illogical, nonsensical, and absurd his arguments are. Trying to bring a realistic sense of meaning and intent to his posts inevitably results in giving him far too much credit for coherent thought.
Lol fair enough. I’m still in “benefit of the doubt” mode, and seeking to understand.
You don't need to assure me of anything that is as self-evident as that.
Sorry about that - it was meant to pre-empt an objection I expect from MG.
One might also look at the King Follett discourse as laying out the potential of God's children. That He would actually desire to give them all that He has. What Father would not want that for their child?
Regards,
MG
A loving father gives freely, yes, but love implies honesty and consistency.
While I am not LDS nor ever have been, I’ve known enough Mormons and been on discussion boards long enough to understand that the god described in Mormon theology seems more transactional than tender.
That god demands loyalty to an ever-changing system that withholds information and affection until worthiness through obedience to arbitrary rules is proven.
Yes, the King Follett Discourse presents the idea of divine potential, but the relationship it describes feels less like a loving parent nurturing a child and more like a ruler grooming subjects for hierarchy.
As an active member I was astounded by the King Follet Discourse. The biggest problem I now see with the ideas therein is that the discourse is not scripture.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
As an active member I was astounded by the King Follet Discourse. The biggest problem I now see with the ideas therein is that the discourse is not scripture.
As an active member I was astounded by the King Follet Discourse. The biggest problem I now see with the ideas therein is that the discourse is not scripture.
You mean not canonized?
Yes - but perhaps I'm ignorantly using the two terms, "scripture", and "canonized", as equivalents.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
As an active member I was astounded by the King Follet Discourse. The biggest problem I now see with the ideas therein is that the discourse is not scripture.
You mean not canonized?
Had Smith survived past the 1840's, the sermon would have eventually been canonized along with a lot of other material to include Book of Abraham additions and the Book of Joseph which he would have translated from the papyrus at hand. That would have proven a real doozy!
Had Smith survived past the 1840's, the sermon would have eventually been canonized along with a lot of other material to include Book of Abraham additions and the Book of Joseph which he would have translated from the papyrus at hand. That would have proven a real doozy!
Oh yeah, I can see that.
Do you think he “backwards-engineered” his theology? Meaning, first explored an idea and then later ascribed it to an ancient source - like the Book of Abraham for example?
In other words, do you think the concepts in the King Follett discourse came from somewhere else and Joseph made them his own?
Last edited by Limnor on Tue Oct 21, 2025 11:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Yes - but perhaps I'm ignorantly using the two terms, "scripture", and "canonized", as equivalents.
I thought you might have meant “not consistent with other received scripture.”
I think the description “not consistent with other received scripture” would apply to a lot of "scripture". For reasonable amounts of consistency we should probably look somewhere other than religion
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
I thought you might have meant “not consistent with other received scripture.”
I think the description “not consistent with other received scripture” would apply to a lot of "scripture". For reasonable amounts of consistency we should probably look somewhere other than religion
That’s fair - I really just wasn’t sure what you meant lol
I think the description “not consistent with other received scripture” would apply to a lot of "scripture". For reasonable amounts of consistency we should probably look somewhere other than religion
That’s fair - I really just wasn’t sure what you meant lol
You and me both
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
