Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

183 Excellent

About Exiled

  • Rank
    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark
  1. We are all just guessing but I don't see God physically around and I don't think you have him over for dinner (I think all know what I mean so no need to claim he is in our hearts, etc.). So, given we are out of his presence, it seems to me that we are well out of the sandbox and on to more adult type pursuits. There is no need to remain infantilized, longing for a parent to tell us what to do.
  2. I do understand it, just not in the same terms as you do. To me, it is like the placebo affect and perhaps helping a believing, suffering cancer victim, for example, to ease the mental anguish that must come from facing imminent death would be beneficial. Other than that, I don't see where it would help.
  3. That is wonderful that you were able to do what you did. You probably worked tirelessly in developing those tests and should be duly credited for doing so.
  4. I'm sorry to confuse you with my questioning. Maybe when you do have time, you could try and unravel my "twisting" points? I think it will lead to agnosticism or some sort of deism, but it may strengthen you to consider alternatives? Even so, the mods here allow non-believers to be among you and as long as church leaders continually claim those who no longer believe are somehow "lost" and that they should be "found", you will have to endure some push-back regarding yours and your church's claims.
  5. So, what is the difference if one gets a priesthood blessing or if one prays or does nothing? The outcome will always be the same, regardless, that of God's will, right? So, is the point of the act to assuage the faithless? If one has the faith not to be healed, then one need not ask for a blessing because it doesn't matter if the person is healed or not. Also, the person giving the blessing is merely putting on an act for the faithless because the faith not to be healed combined with the faith to be healed renders the act a nullity for the faithful. So, why even waste one's time with this? Better yet, why not just admit that priesthood blessings are a relic from the pre-science era? Maybe E. Bednar didn't think this through? Maybe he wanted a convenient way to stop people from bothering the other g.a.'s and him for blessings? Or maybe the faith not to be healed is a unintended confession of pointless ritual?
  6. You claim that God is the source for medical science and are giving him all the credit from the beginning. The scientists' work is therefore put in the backseat to God, because all glory for success is his. Doesn't this seem pretty selfish? I don't think God is this way, wanting to hog all the glory for what man does. So, is this how you act with your own children? You trained them and equipped them to go out in the world. So, naturally all of their successes are really yours, right? Or maybe because God needs to take credit for your training success as well, he takes credit for your children's successes?
  7. I'm talking about viewing occurrences where priesthood blessings are involved. One needs to have a view imposed on one, by religionists, where the times when the blessing works, it is priesthood power in action and when it doesn't work, God didn't want it to work or the priesthood holder was at fault somehow. This way God is never wrong, by after the fact justification, regardless of what really happened.
  8. Right, God never loses by design. The game is rigged in his favor, according to the religionists who benefit from this man-made system. So, what's the point of priesthood blessings or prayer if it is always dependent on God's will? Don't do anything or pray, pray, pray and the result is the same.
  9. I guess we can always credit success to God, but that seems to not be how it works, or should work. If a scientist works and studies and comes up with a discovery, is it really God or religionists stealing credit for God where they shouldn't? I would think God would want to credit his children for their successes and not hog all the glory. However, religionists seem to want God to do this. They want a God that takes all the credit for anything good and blame man for the failures. Is this how you act with your children?
  10. They lower the bar to justify whatever happens as being success. If it works, it becomes a conference talk, if it doesn't, it is having faith not to be healed. This way, God (really men pretending) never loses, conveniently.
  11. It doesn't work at times. My friend's husband still died of cancer despite numerous priesthood blessings and constant prayer. If that is still chocked up as a success, that is exactly what I and others are saying, that when someone doesn't get well, it is rationalized as God's will. Failure is rationalized as God's will, e.g., have faith not to be healed. If failures are justified in this way, then heads we win and tails God's will wins. It never is subject to failure. Don't get me wrong, I like always coming out on top too, however, life doesn't work that way.
  12. I grew up around the apostles and their children and grandchildren as probably some commenters here did. Some were in my ward, some were in my stake and some were in neighboring stakes. My former home teacher was President Tanner's personal physician back in the day. They sought the aid of medical science when sick as they should have. I never equated our people with christian scientists and the like. However, seeking to take advantage of medical science seems to show how they give priority to medical science and its benefits over the all-mighty priesthood power and the faith not to be healed.
  13. I think this underlines what the reality of priesthood blessings really is, that of excusing its ineffectiveness when it doesn't work and giving credit to it when it isn't deserved. It's like the magic blacelet or jupiter talisman or magic beans, etc. that some unfortuneately believe work just as well, but are similarly the product of overactive imaginations.
  14. When the apostles are sick, they go see a doctor (I don't know if anybody has already mentioned this). They seem to rely more on science than priesthood in these matters.
  15. He is 30 to 40 years behind the times, seemingly.