Damien the Leper

A little more specific would be Acts 29 Reformed.

Jeff Durbin is quite the wolf in sheep's clothing not only within Reformed/Calvinist circles in general but also toward past congregants. It doesn't help that he is a postmillennial theonomist that intersects with his love for Christian Nationalism. That is some seriously bad business.

Because they never really wanted God to do the other miracle.

🤪

I don't know what you're talking about.

I didn't say it was.

This I'm familiar with. Paul and James would have likely disagreed on this subject as James held a more traditionally Jewish perspective in the sense that Jesus+Circumcision=Correct. Whereas Paul laid aside such traditions. I do sincerely thank you for posting this, nonetheless.

The original gangstas. The original 12. Duh!

Jesus didn't start a church. He started a revolutionary movement that would one day become His church. This church has consistently existed for nearly two millenia.

Did the OG12 institute a racial ban needing an apology to be granted?

True. Nelson isn't the Vicar of Christ.

It was a sleazy way to bandwagon.

Nope. I'm just keeping the playing field leveled. I'm not into collective guilt. The current leadership is not guilty of what rogue general authorities did in 1852. They've just been stuck with the consequences of the actions taken that lack evidence of revelation or inspiration. However, today's representatives can easily say that what was done wrong and condemn it with extreme prejudice. Like what I did there? 😜 I'm not familiar with the term. However, if you're trying to accuse me of mindreading then you're wrong again. I included in my statement the word if. Crying presentism doesn't help you either. Though I guess it could work...my grandmother was 16 when she married my grandfather who was 29. That was also the time when it was okay for a man to beat his wife. So yes...presentism does check out. I apologize.

Wonderful. You're adorable. Please show me evidence of acknowledgement that the church, in say the last quarter century, apologized for rogue behavior that led to the ban with the admission that wrong doing was done all along. Take your time. I'll wait. Apologies. I suppose it would be more appropriate for those who have done wrong to determine when and if an apology is ever worth giving. The narcissist and the institution are the same entity who will not humble themselves enough to apologize. The Borg, a hive mind, are a collective. The church is a top-down authoritarian theocracy. I do not use authoritarian as a pejorative. The institutional church, despite the handbook, policies, and doctrines, and the membership are not of a single collective mind. And that is absolutely wonderful. No. How about the FP and Q12 simply apologize for the wrongdoing of past leadership and simply state that past leadership acted without evidence of revelation or inspiration? No. The sin being the ban that was instituted in 1852 that lasted nearly a century (84 years) and which was ended not even half a century ago (46 years). If your goal is to provide an apologetic argument in defense of that which is indefensible then you have your own guilt to deal with and not the guilt of the ignoramuses who thought a priesthood ban was somehow a good idea.

What you think your church does in sincerity and what it actually does are not necessarily the same thing. I'm not suggesting that the church is absolutely insincere. Should the apology be deemed sufficient simply because you and your church say you're being sincere? After all this time? Really? The seeking of an apology is far from a recent topic of discussion. The lack of good faith comes from the institution who will not give an apology, nor does it believe an apology is necessarily deserved. The narcissist will claim that they were right, even if wrong, in doing what they did and then making it worse by not apologizing. Narcissists don't apologize. The church isn't a collective. It is an institution. No guilt is being ascribed to you, Smac. You don't owe an apology. However, those who have the attitude of "Is offering an apology even worth it?" perpetuate the sin therefore acting in no kind of faith at all.

It would be odd and ignorant if someone were to wrongly conflate the institution with God/Jesus. Almost as if to say that the Lord need not apologize for what the institution places responsibility on God/Jesus. That is a major red flag. Furthermore, it makes absolutely no sense that Jesus, a brown skinned Middle Eastern man, would favor white people in some way over black people involving holy sacraments. That is also a major red flag. What an untrustworthy god or institution those would be.

This also includes The Corporation of the President or CEO or Board Members of [Insert church name here]. The bottom line and mass exploitation of the commodity of spirituality is their primary focus.

The Holy Spirit puts prophets and apostles in check.

I'm still hoping There is a Green Hill Far Away, There is Sunshine in My Soul Today, Put Your Shoulder to the Wheel and A Poor Wayfaring Man of Grief are left out. @bluebell mentioned True to the Faith... good call!!

CS Lewis is quite profound. He died a staunch Anglican and I hope he remains as such in the hereafter. The Jensen book that came out around 20 years ago does nothing to further the ill-informed rumor that he was somehow "almost Mormon". Lewis is worthy of quoting just as NT Wright. Several years ago, I attended a ward that a friend was a part of. He was speaking that day, and I went to show support. I had no idea what his sermon was about and can't remember what it was about now. But I do remember him quoting NT Wright several times. I haven't spoken to him in some time. Maybe I'll ask him about it.

I would like a statement from God declaring Joseph Smith wrong in ordaining blacks to the priesthood. Next, a statement from God declaring that blacks are no longer allowed to hold the priesthood. Finally, a statement from God on why He changed His mind in 1978. I'm just asking for simple clarification without need for speculation, odd reasoning, plausible deniability, mental gymnastics, or poorly stated rationalizations by finite mortals on the behalf of a 100% consistent yesterday, today and forever God. This is a perfectly simple request.

I had never heard of Harrison before now and Googled him. Mormon Stories, though I am not a fan, did an episode about him and one of the contributors is Lori Vallow's sister. I'll listen at another time. However, the episode also discusses Tim Ballard as well.

Wait... this Ballard guy joined the Catholic Church?

How long were you on Limited?

It is a total joke. It was a myth that I think we may have shared a chuckle about through our computer screens a long time ago. My desired response was that you'd roll your eyes, chuckle, and then throw the nearest solid object at my head.