Another Anti-Mormon Who Just Doesn't Get It

[_beastie]

Okay.....messing with the phraseology that much makes me question how much faith was involved. But, I know nothing of it so my analysis is worthless.

You have got to be kidding.

First, I only started "messing with the phraseology" when I kept receiving the "stupor of thought" response. Second, the church itself stresses the importance of phrasing your questions correctly in order to allow God to clearly answer.

So are you saying that God would refuse to answer "is the LDS church the only church with the true authority of the priesthood of JC"???

Wow.

[_beastie]

If you doubt that teaching pray about it and figure it out. It's not rocket science.

Well, then, obviously Brigham Young prayed about it and knew the teaching was correct before sharing it.

It seems to me that the modern church ought not to be ashamed of any teaching that originated from God.

[_Scottie]

I think Prophets and Apostles pray for inspiration and teach and act on it. I do not believe this means that every word out of their mouth is the personal opinion of God. They're mortal and do the best they can. They have the responsibility and the right to convey the Word of God to the best of their ability (and they do a good job). Those who listen then take that work and interpret it themselves (as to how to use said revelation) using revelation from God. This means that member can't rely on Prophets absolutely and that they can't ignore them.

It would seems more than a little bizarre that you would have to explain such seemingly obvious and basic principles were Beastie actually in a position to lecture God and his Church about the need for clarity--and this, ironically, as a non-believer.

But, since she clearly is not, then her thinking she is, and doing so anyway, provides the perfect object lesson for the point you and I and other LDS have been trying to get across. In the immortal words of of the prison captain, of "Cool Hand Luke" fame:

"Some people you just can't reach."

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The problem here is that you both want to make it sound like we are asking what color Jesus eyes were, or how far up the mountain was the burning bush that Moses talked to.

No, what I see is that LDS prophets are making BOLD assertions and MAJOR doctrinal theologies ... which we later find our were completely wrong.

Now, sure, if a prophet were to get up and say, "Man will never land on the moon", I could sort of see forgiving that. But when a prophet gets up and says, "Blacks will never receive the priesthood until all the sons of Adam have received it first" and then implements "policy" to back that up, well, that's a big deal and it makes us question their communications with God.

[_wenglund]

Just because you claim to know what God is really saying doesn't make it so.

I have yet to make any such claim on this thread. Certainly not in the post you quoted. It is entrely beside the point I was making.

So, yet again we find you putting words into my mouth instead of hearing what I actually said. NOt coincidentally, there seems to be a pattern emerging.

Every religious zealot claims this same thing, including the terrorists.

I have to question a God who speaks in riddles and parables and metaphors, expects us all to decipher what is being said, and not have any confusion??

I have no idea what God you are thinking of, but the God I am familiar with fully expects, if not intends for there to be confusion--for the reasons explained, but apparently still lost on you (and perhaps for your benefit)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Some Schmo]

First of all, I think it's more than a bit amusing that you suggest I need god to hold my hand when you are the one who needs to believe in a god; I don't.

First of all, I didn’t suggest that one needs a god to hold their hand in so far as explaining every facet of theology and truth is concerned. Indeed, I argued against such a notion, which should have been obvious, but apparently your comprehension skills are lacking.

Oh, you're one of those. (Moved to being insulting already, huh? Awesome.) If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh*t. I see.

Should I feel bad because I didn't read your mind? lol

Secondly, I don’t need to believe in a god any more than you do.

Then don't. See how that works out for you. It might make you happy.

I'd respond to the rest of your ridiculous back peddling (I was about to) and irrational thoughts, but I don't see the use. Maybe tomorrow I'll feel like it. Who knows?





_______

[_The Nehor]

Well, then, obviously Brigham Young prayed about it and knew the teaching was correct before sharing it.

Did he?

[_Scottie]

I have yet to make any such claim on this thread. Certainly not in the post you quoted. It is entrely beside the point I was making.

So, yet again we find you putting words into my mouth instead of hearing what I actually said. NOt coincidentally, there seems to be a pattern emerging.

Wait... weren't you the one saying you had eyes to see and ears to hear?

I have no idea what God you are thinking of, but the God I am familiar with fully expects, if not intends for there to be confusion--for the reasons explained, but apparently still lost on you (and perhaps for your benefit)

Right. Great plan.

I think maybe I'll try this on my kids. I'm going to give them 5 different sets of multiplication flash cards. One set has the ALL correct answers and the other 4 have some correct and some wrong answers. I won't tell them which set is right. They have to pick one then ask me if it correct. Regardless of which set they pick, I will tell them it is the correct one. Because, you know, there are SOME right answers in all of the sets. So technically I'm not lying. I'll make sure their teachers are in on it too. If they ask the teacher if a specific card is right, I'll have the teacher give a random yes or no. I'll be sure to tell the kids that the teacher MAY be giving his opinion and that they can ask me if the teacher is right. When they ask me if the teacher was right, I'll give them a random yes or no answer... if I bother to answer them at all. Even though I've thrown them into a world of chaos and confusion, eventually I suspect they will figure out for themselves which set is correct.

[_Some Schmo]

Right. Great plan.

I think maybe I'll try this on my kids. I'm going to give them 5 different sets of multiplication flash cards. One set has the ALL correct answers and the other 4 have some correct and some wrong answers. I won't tell them which set is right. They have to pick one then ask me if it correct. Regardless of which set they pick, I will tell them it is the correct one. Because, you know, there are SOME right answers in all of the sets. So technically I'm not lying. I'll make sure their teachers are in on it too. If they ask the teacher if a specific card is right, I'll have the teacher give a random yes or no. I'll be sure to tell the kids that the teacher MAY be giving his opinion and that they can ask me if the teacher is right. When they ask me if the teacher was right, I'll give them a random yes or no answer... if I bother to answer them at all. Even though I've thrown them into a world of chaos and confusion, eventually I suspect they will figure out for themselves which set is correct.

Awesome.

I just can't understand how anyone could possibly feel right about not worshipping this kind of parenting? What are you people, stupid?

lol

[_beastie]

Nehor:

If you doubt that teaching pray about it and figure it out. It's not rocket science.

Beastie:

Well, then, obviously Brigham Young prayed about it and knew the teaching was correct before sharing it.

Nehor

Did he?

Some evil person posting as Nehor to confuse us, kind of like God does:

(quoting beastie first: So the second option is that the prophets, themselves, are not always able to discern the difference between their own opinions and the mind and will of the Lord, despite having prayed for such guidance beforehand. Defenders of the faith seem to accept option two, and then claim that the resolution to this option is that each member pray and find out for him or herself if what the prophet taught was his own opinion or the will of the Lord.) Nehor: A variation of what I said.

So we know it’s not rocket science. We know Nehor thinks prophets pray for guidance before addressing the church as prophet. Yet, somehow, in the end, prophets are still not always able to discern the difference between their own opinions and the mind of the Lord.

Hence, the calling of prophet must result in a deterioration of the ability to perform what, according to Nehor, is not rocket science.

[_The Nehor]

The problem here is that you both want to make it sound like we are asking what color Jesus eyes were, or how far up the mountain was the burning bush that Moses talked to.

Not having that intention.

No, what I see is that LDS prophets are making BOLD assertions and MAJOR doctrinal theologies ... which we later find our were completely wrong.

See, this is where we disagree. Two or three sermons in the Journal of Discourses and I'm to think it's a major doctrine? I've read the Journal of Discourses and those sermons are rare. Brigham Young had the habit (a bad one in my opinion) of declaring things to be the world of the Lord far too often. On the whole though I love his off the cuff style of speaking and wish we had more of it today. Great guy, that Brigham.

Now, sure, if a prophet were to get up and say, "Man will never land on the moon", I could sort of see forgiving that. But when a prophet gets up and says, "Blacks will never receive the priesthood until all the sons of Adam have received it first" and then implements "policy" to back that up, well, that's a big deal and it makes us question their communications with God.

The Prophet may have been wrong or maybe the descendants of Abel (I think that's what he said) have gotten the Priesthood. I don't have an answer. I asked and was given enough of an answer to let me put it to rest and told to inquire no more until he chooses to share more with me.