Careful vs. Casual

[Bernard Gui]

8 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

This is one of the most important lessons in the Book of Mormon's accounts of the Liahona. Without diligence and faith, it was worthless. People might just as well have been having a conversation with themselves instead. In some cases, I think that may be what some people prefer ...

Yes. On a hard journey, a non-functioning Liahona becomes a burden that is eventually discarded. We need to think about that. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

6 hours ago, california boy said:

I think you are misrepresenting what I have been talking about.  I never said one should chuck the scriptures.  We are talking about how we approach religion.  I think anyone who has been on this board for a while can see two basic groups when discussing just about any issue.  One group is very ridged and their answer to every issue is to fall back on some statement a prophet either past or present has said. and that is their answer.  They say things like' I'll stick with the prophets you can choose otherwise if you wish.

The other group looks thinks the answers are not so clear cut.  They are unwilling to simply take the words of a prophet and think no further on the matter.  They think there is more to the story than a set answer given 20 years ago, or 100 years ago or 6000 years ago.  It is not about what someone said in the past, it is about what God says to them today.  The scriptures are a tool, not a final word.

Some see clear guidance in the scriptures themselves.  Clearly all that commit adultery should be stoned.  Anyone picking corn on Sunday is breaking the Sabbath.  That is what God said.  It is crystal clear as you say.

In our day, we don't pick up stones.  And we are allowed to go grab an ear of corn out of the garden.  But do we let someone in a dance that isn't wearing the prescribed outfit when the dress code has been clearly given by the brethren in SLC?  What if they have already been warned, and still show up inappropriately?  Is it wrong to forbid the baptizing of a child because the parents of that child are gay?  Should we question such a policy or is President Nelson telling us it is revelation good enough for us?  Did God clearly tell Joseph Smith to marry his teenage wives behind Emma's back or perhaps he got that wrong.  Let's sing "Praise to the Man" and put any doubts behind us.

Pick just about any subject that comes up on this thread and you will see different ways of approaching the issues.  We all know the players.  We usually know their responses before they give them.  Both sides use the scriptures to support their positions.  Read through this thread, you will find that each approach supports their position with scripture.  It is how we use that scriptures that makes all the difference.  Who is right and who is wrong on what approach is best depends entirely on what group you fall into.  Hold to the rod?  Look to the Liahona for guidance.  Which one dominates your approach to deciding the issues we discuss.

Interesting thoughts. It’s still a false dilemma because it ignores the scriptural context where we first learn about them. They can’t be separated from each other. If you let go of the Word of God, there is no Liahona. The Word is not just scriptures, but also the words of the prophets and personal revelation. 

[Meerkat]

On 5/26/2019 at 5:29 PM, Calm said:

That would slow down travel times, require more engineers per train and that would drive up prices which would create hardship for a large number of the poorer sector. 

Go through a stop sign?  Get in a wreck.  Lesson learned.  Stop on a track, stay in the car,?  Get killed.  Harsh lesson, but not entirely the responsibility of the engineer.  

Laws and regulations govern speeds on the highways and railways.  

There doesn’t seem much communities can do to slow them down.  Similar to Gospel laws, they may have a certain strictness, and we have responsibilities and a brain to analyze circumstances.  

Are we supposed to expect others to learn their lessons to eliminate our adversity?  How do we expect to learn?  I think we can analyze and learn from our circumstances.  I think the process requires a certain amount of surrender and humility to learn our responsibility.  No so much blaming the engineer.  

[california boy]

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Interesting thoughts. It’s still a false dilemma because it ignores the scriptural context where we first learn about them. They can’t be separated from each other. If you let go of the Word of God, there is no Liahona. The Word is not just scriptures, but also the words of the prophets and personal revelation. 

You do realize that I never suggested letting go of the scriptures nor the words of the prophets.  I am not sure why you wrote this response.  It doesn't make any sense in context of what I actually wrote. Care to explain?

I actually put this in bold letters in my response so you wouldn't ignore it.  I guess you chose to anyway.

Quote

It is how we use that scriptures that makes all the difference. 

And this.

Quote

The other group looks thinks the answers are not so clear cut.  They are unwilling to simply take the words of a prophet and think no further on the matter.  They think there is more to the story than a set answer given 20 years ago, or 100 years ago or 6000 years ago.  It is not about what someone said in the past, it is about what God says to them today.  The scriptures are a tool, not a final word.

It is about finding out for one's self whether they are the words of the flesh or of God.  I never suggested ignoring them.

Edited July 16, 2019 by california boy

[Bernard Gui]

55 minutes ago, california boy said:

You do realize that I never suggested letting go of the scriptures nor the words of the prophets.  I am not sure why you wrote this response.  It doesn't make any sense in context of what I actually wrote. Care to explain?

I actually put this in bold letters in my response so you wouldn't ignore it.  I guess you chose to anyway.

And this.

It is about finding out for one's self whether they are the words of the flesh or of God.  I never suggested ignoring them.

I have said that I don’t buy the bifurcated Iron Rod/Liahona approaches. I think it is an invention from the misunderstanding and misapplication of the scriptures. That’s why I have responded. I think calling members Iron Rodders and Liahonans is bogus. I would be interested in your response to the actual scriptures. 

[california boy]

11 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I have said that I don’t buy the bifurcated Iron Rod/Liahona approaches. I think it is an invention from the misunderstanding and misapplication of the scriptures. That’s why I have responded. I think calling members Iron Rodders and Liahonans is bogus. I would be interested in your response to the actual scriptures. 

It is fine to disagree.  I just object when you misrepresent what I am saying when you imply that I throw out all scripture and the words of the prophets