God can write straight with crooked lines.

[bill4long]

What does it really mean in Ephesians 4:6 to say that God is in and through “all things”?

Regards,
MG

Paul is talking about unity and indwelling, not retroactive moral justification.

Moreover, Greek pas (πᾶς) is contextually dependent. A fuller, but clunkier, rendering of the intent in English:

one God and Father of all of this stuff I've been writing about,
who reigns over all of this stuff I've been writing about,
and actively participates in all this stuff I've been writing about,
and is totally aware of all this stuff I've been writing about,

...referring to the topics at hand. It's not a statement that God actively participates in, or in any way justifies, say, child molestation or any other evil deeds.

[malkie]

I will readily confess to not having carefully read every word of every post in this thread. In spite of that, I have the growing feeling from what I have read that Mormon god is a supreme mental gymnast.

[Limnor]

Why what works for me? God?

By “what works for you,” I meant a way of maintaining belief in what Joseph wrought even as the evidence against accumulates into what most people would call a heap.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

I think we can all do better day by day in doing that. Myself included. It's easy to judge others as being of something 'less' than ourselves in regards to character, intelligence, righteousness, integrity, etc.

The only poster that does that is you. You do it all the time. To everyone. I note your admission that you find it easy.

You use the “we can do better” line to excuse yourself from accountability, because you know you have no intention of changing. You are not a good faith actor, and haven’t been for many many many years. If indeed you ever were.

There ought to be periodic 'FaceTime Chats where we can see and get a 'feel' for the 'other'. We might treat each other a little differently.

Has meeting malkie in person led to you treating him a little differently on here? Or do you still speak down to him like he’s a piece of crap on your shoe?

Blame shifting is a sign that the person is probably; emotionally immature, fearful of consequences, was never taught, or never learned to take responsibility during their upbringing, control issues, deliberately manipulative, has a serious personality disorder (in cases where blame shifting is a pathological ingrained pattern of behaviour). It is interesting to watch you repeat a pattern of behaviour that hasn’t changed year after year after year(as Res Ipsa has shown), and to which having personal knowledge of who someone is, makes no discernible difference.

Having known Fibber in real life and in the flesh for nearly 17 years, including time in his own home, I can say with the authority of a seasoned biographer that his only sincere commitment here is to trolling. To call Fibber a bad faith actor would be an insult to bad actors everywhere. His presence here isn't a quest for truth or to be a missionary. He holds everyone here in complete disdain.

[MG 2.0]

It is appropriate to post the following at this time:

To be clear, any one poster on this board doesn't speak for my intentions, and dismissing me as ‘only trolling’ avoids engaging what I’ve actually written. If there’s an error in my facts or reasoning, point it out and I’ll address it.

I've presented ideas and/or concepts that present themselves as 'out of the box' thinking. Gadianton and and one or two others have made efforts to connect with and respond to my recent posts over the last few days. I've noticed that when responses are wearing thin on 'the other side' that there are one or two posters that jump in with defamation posts against my character.

And we end up here.

Unfortunately it appears that he will engage in this behavior knowing that he is not telling the truth. There is very little I can do in these situations other than to point out, especially to that one individual, who and what they are.

A bald faced liar.

I would ask this individual a question:

Have you no shame? I don't expect this behavior to stop, but I do need to call it out for what it is. Childish.

When this happens, unfortunately, the thread suddenly takes a turn for the worse and becomes focused on one individual. Me. I do not seek that result out...however much some might think this to be so.

I hope others can see it for what it is. Character assassination. I would ask this individual who is currently claiming the limelight to cease and desist. I am interested in further comments having to do with the OP and maybe even some of the questions/comment I've presented in the last few days.

If not...Tolkien!!

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Fibber,

It’s impressive how you managed to write several paragraphs about yourself just to complain that the thread is about you. If you’re truly worried about character assassination, you might want to stop handing everyone so much ammunition.

Have you no shame, Fibber?

[Marcus]

God can enter into already crooked cultural, psychological, and institutional conditions and regulate or limit them without endorsing their crooked aspects as His own moral character.

I don't think MG will be able to explain what this group of words means, nor provide any specific examples that demonstrate whatever it is he thinks he's saying.

That reads more like demonic powers than what a god might do. It's also not remotely what is taught as lds doctrine. In trying to understand what mentalgymnast is saying, I went back to his original post:

...In my previous post I proposed that revelation is filtered through Joseph’s psychology, 19th‑century patriarchy, and biblical precedent.

In other words, God can enter into already crooked cultural, psychological, and institutional conditions and regulate or limit them without endorsing their crooked aspects as His own moral character.

Working with "crooked lines” is categorically different from being the author of crookedness.

God regulates slavery in the Old Testament. We wouldn't say that He was 'the author of slavery' in the sense of approving the institution as ideal... it is rather obvious that God is addressing a people who already live inside it, with all the moral hazards that entails.

Joseph didn't live in a vacuum. His revelations were filtered through cultural, psychological, Biblical interpretation/precident, views on patriarchy, etc. He also lived inside a bubble of existence that was open to moral hazards.

In Section 132 when we read “Verily thus saith the Lord” we might see it as a human framing of a real but limited encounter with God, not a guarantee that the entire section, in its every detail, is morally pristine.

Consider the rather 'rocky road' involved in the publication of that section. It may well be that Section 132 in the D&C is the 'showcase example' of God demonstrating, in real time, that He can write straight with crooked lines...

This just reads as though mentalgymnast's god is extremely limited in what he can tell humans to do, and in his ability to define what he wants to happen. Even with direct revelation, he can't get humans to understand that what they are doing is not what he has asked them to do. He apparently can't even reveal to humans what he wants, because he's forced to allow humans to do things their way, even though he considers it wrong, because he can only tell humans to do things they already do.

Limnor, I really think mentalgymnast is in over his head. in my opinion, he's allowing AI to write this nonsense because his AI prompts are so illogical. Mormon stuff is already odd, but this nonsense from mentalgymnast is beyond the pale. It does not in any way reflect what Mormons believe.

I will readily confess to not having carefully read every word of every post in this thread. In spite of that, I have the growing feeling from what I have read that Mormon god is a supreme mental gymnast.

Indeed.

[I Have Questions]

It is appropriate to post the following at this time:

To be clear, any one poster on this board doesn't speak for my intentions, and dismissing me as ‘only trolling’ avoids engaging what I’ve actually written. If there’s an error in my facts or reasoning, point it out and I’ll address it.

Anyone who has ever interacted with you on this board knows for a fact that that’s a lie.

I've presented ideas and/or concepts that present themselves as 'out of the box' thinking. Gadianton and and one or two others have made efforts to connect with and respond to my recent posts over the last few days. I've noticed that when responses are wearing thin on 'the other side' that there are one or two posters that jump in with defamation posts against my character.

Do you genuinely not see how Gadianton has shown, very clearly, that your thinking on God writing straight with crooked lines is not “out of the box” it’s simply untenable from the evidence. And you’ve avoided grasping that nettle. Gadianton’s responses haven’t worn thin, you’ve simply run out of distractions to avoid taking it on the chin that you’ve been shown to be erroneous in your thinking.

[I Have Questions]

In Section 132 when we read “Verily thus saith the Lord” we might see it as a human framing of a real but limited encounter with God, not a guarantee that the entire section, in its every detail, is morally pristine.

You are explicitly saying that SLC LDS scriptures, and SLC LDS Prophets can erroneously promote immorality. And therefore they cannot be trusted. Thank you for admitting that.

Consider the rather 'rocky road' involved in the publication of that section. It may well be that Section 132 in the D&C is the 'showcase example' of God demonstrating, in real time, that He can write straight with crooked lines.

I would love for you to explain, in relation to Joseph’s adultery, what about it was crooked lines, and how section 132 writes it straight. Please be specific.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

If only Occam’s Razor were easy to understand..