Book of Mormon musical’s new ad campaign

[Pyreaux]

30 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

I didn’t present tithing as a get out of jail free card.  Just illustrated our own canonized scriptures state one will be burned if they don’t pay tithing. That’s it. 
 

Mormon church looks at all tithing and donations as not being tithing unless paid into ensign peak. 

Still intellectually dishonest.

No - that's not “it.” That’s not how scripture or LDS doctrine works. We do take it seriously. But no one reads Matthew 25, where Christ uses parables about fire, oil, goats, and lamps to be meant to be interpreted woodenly. You're just cherry-picking one sentence and stripping it of all theological nuance and surrounding context, that is not sincere. Therefore, it's you I wouldn't take seriously.

No - Ensign Peak is an investment division. Members don't pay to Ensign Peak. They pay tithing, then the Church responsibly manages its use - some of it going into reserves, yes. Thats like saying baptism “only counts if the water eventually ends up in the church’s plumbing system.” That might be what happens, but not what "counts". It’s just intentionally inflammatory framing with no merit.

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

You still haven’t shown anyone saying it’s not figurative, so who isn’t telling the truth?

Both prophets who spoke did not say it was figurative speech. That wasn’t my goal anyway. It was stated we don’t teach fire and brimstone or burning hell or whatever and that the playbill is deceptive.
 

A cursory search found two living prophets stating we are burned if we don’t pay tithing.  The advertisers are not out on a limb. Sure to a member of the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints who wants to get offended about playbills about “Mormons” well I guess mental gymnastics can twist it into  persecution. 
 

it is just an ad. Mormons and the COJCOLDS have zero cultural cachet in the world.  We r going to get made fun of.

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, Pyreaux said:

Still intellectually dishonest.

No - that's not “it.” That’s not how scripture or LDS doctrine works. We do take it seriously. But no one reads Matthew 25, where Christ uses parables about fire, oil, goats, and lamps to be meant to be interpreted woodenly. You're just cherry-picking one sentence and stripping it of all theological nuance and surrounding context, that is not sincere. Therefore, it's you I wouldn't take seriously.

No - Ensign Peak is an investment division. Members don't pay to Ensign Peak. They pay tithing, then the Church responsibly manages its use - some of it going into reserves, yes. Thats like saying baptism “only counts if the water eventually ends up in the church’s plumbing system.” That might be what happens, but not what "counts". It’s just intentionally inflammatory framing with no merit.

Thats how I believe it works. 
 

Ensign peak is the church. You can write a tithing check to your ward, your stake, the local gilbert mission, the corporation of… etc. stick it in that blue envelope and it goes on deposit for the church. What’s left goes to ensign peak to be invested in the stock market.  The sec investigation told us so and the church did not deny it. 
 

speaking of baptisms… they only count if they are done by Mormon authority . All the rest are false and we do teach that. Ask Brad Wilcox. ALL OTHER RELIGIONS ARE PLAYING CHURCH, which means their ordinances, their baptisms, their weddings, their tithing, their priesthood is all fake. John dehlin had a good commentary on that.  Can provide if you like. 

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, Pyreaux said:

Therefore, it's you I wouldn't take seriously.

I don’t expect you to. I don’t claim to be a prophet like those who are saying these things. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 hours ago, Notatbm said:

All non Mormons will burn at the second coming.

You do understand how patently false this statement is, correct?

Makes me wonder how much you actually understand concerning the doctrines of the Restoration.

[Tony uk]

I have seen the advertising for the 'Book of Mormon's, as well as the recent movie 'The Heretic'. Some may say any advertising, is good, compared to no advertising at all. In the case of these two media performances I really do beg to differ on the old adage. Any attempt to mock belief through almost subtle means. A cheap and nasty way of entertaining in my own opinion, and not necessarily correct. 

[Pyreaux]

15 hours ago, Notatbm said:

Thats how I believe it works. 
 

Ensign peak is the church. You can write a tithing check to your ward, your stake, the local gilbert mission, the corporation of… etc. stick it in that blue envelope and it goes on deposit for the church. What’s left goes to ensign peak to be invested in the stock market.  The sec investigation told us so and the church did not deny it. 
 

speaking of baptisms… they only count if they are done by Mormon authority . All the rest are false and we do teach that. Ask Brad Wilcox. ALL OTHER RELIGIONS ARE PLAYING CHURCH, which means their ordinances, their baptisms, their weddings, their tithing, their priesthood is all fake. John dehlin had a good commentary on that.  Can provide if you like. 

Be honest 

The “Corporation of the President” is the legal entity that holds Church assets. It’s standard for religious and nonprofit organizations to have a corporate structure for legal, tax, and ownership purposes. Church’s investments, including those managed by Ensign Peak, are not evidence of corruption, they’re evidence of long-term responsibility.

Every serious institution on earth with humanitarian or global goals builds financial reserves. Universities, hospitals, disaster relief organizations: They all invest, because money that grows can serve more people in the long run. That’s good stewardship.

You're wrong, tithing is used for Church operations first: temples, chapels, humanitarian aid, educational programs, missionary work, etc. Only surplus funds - what’s left after all operational needs - go to investments, including Ensign Peak. Ensign Peak invests prudently, with the purpose of: Preserving Church stability for the long-term, preparing for future emergencies or economic downturns, funding future Church needs without relying on debt. Tithing is not automatically funneled to stock markets.

Nonprofits do invest quietly; Harvard, Stanford, and major universities manage billions in endowments; Catholic dioceses often hold real estate and investment funds through subsidiary corporations. The Church acted based on professional legal and financial advice, believing its approach complied with the law. Ensign Peak was instructed to structure filings within legal bounds. The Church has consistently said it followed the advice of outside legal counsel and accountants.

Anyone implying that the SEC exposed wrongdoing with tithing or ethics, that’s not what happened. It was a paperwork and transparency violation, not a misuse of member donations or deception of members. The Church cooperated, paid the fine, and updated its processes. Hence the lawsuits against the Church over Ensign Peak have been failing because unlike you, the legal system recognizes there is a difference between: Mistakes in regulatory compliance and actual fraud, theft, or donor deception.

And no, the Church doesn’t teach that that sincere acts of faith outside the LDS tradition are worthless. We believe priesthood authority matters for ordinances, LDS scripture (like D&C 137 and 2 Nephi 9) makes clear that people are judged according to the light and knowledge they have, and that God accepts the sincere wherever they are.

So no - we don’t believe other faiths are “playing church.” We believe God works in many ways and honors the devotion and gestures of all His children. We do believe He established specific institutions for those ends, because He should. Whatever this Restrictavist non-sense you are pretending exists, doesn't exist. But there is always a best way. If you show me better, maybe I'd listen, but doubt there is.

John Dehlin is not an objective or reliable source of honest information. His platform thrives on sensationalism and selective framing that often misrepresents. Which is why his influence is already waning, his sort of content rarely sustains long-term credibility or growth. Serious thinkers and balanced critics tend to move on when they realize emotional outrage isn’t a substitute for accuracy.

Edited July 15, 2025 by Pyreaux

[bluebell]

18 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I didn’t present tithing as a get out of jail free card.  Just illustrated our own canonized scriptures state one will be burned if they don’t pay tithing. That’s it. 
 

Mormon church looks at all tithing and donations as not being tithing unless paid into ensign peak. 
 

 

You kind of did though, because the implication of your post is that you can be a child sexual predator, a murderer, rapist, whatever most degenerite thing you can think of, but if you pay your tithing, you get to stay on the earth during the millennium with all the righteous.

Your illustration is flawed though, because you've tried to take that one verse out of context.

According to scripture is is the wicked who will be burned at His second coming.  Will all non tithe payers be considered wicked? No, they won't.  Can a non tithe payer be considered wicked?  Yes, they can.  God will judge.

Edited July 15, 2025 by bluebell

[The Nehor]

17 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

The ad campaign reflects their comedic tone: irreverent, provocative, and exaggerated - often at the expense of accuracy or sensitivity. Is it thinking missionaries preach hellfire, or are obsessed with saving people from hell? It’s riffing on the cultural perception of religious missionaries as “saving souls from hell”, even though that’s not how LDS missionaries actually talk or frame their message. It’s a spoof of how outsiders misunderstand all missionaries, especially those seen as “earnest” or “intense.”

There’s no “hellfire” doctrine like in many Evangelical circles. LDS hell is nuanced, usually “spirit prison” (temporary) or damnation, being outside God's presence (degrees of glory). The tone is usually hopeful and positive, focused on Christ, family, and personal revelation.

You are right. The musical is often a racialized and reductive parody, particularly in how it portrays Ugandans and trivializes both their lived experience and LDS faith. While it’s praised in self-proclaimed 'anti-racism' enlightened secular circles. It highlights how often they'll tolerate how someone distorts or misrepresents minority faiths like Mormonism in the name of comedy or shock value. 

South Park creators often say they "mock everything equally" but in practice, they don’t. Islam, especially after the backlash to things like the Danish cartoons or Charlie Hebdo, is often avoided or treated more cautiously, not always out of respect, but out of fear of reprisal. In contrast, Mormonism is seen as a “safe target”: Latter-day Saints are polite, nonviolent, and typically don’t respond with outrage. The faith is distinctive, small, and misunderstood making it easy to distort for laughs as the audience doesn't know what's being exaggerated or invented.

“You can make fun of them - they’ll just send you cookies.” That’s a real quote used in media circles about LDS members.

No, South Park went much further in mocking Islam than most are willing to do. They got death threats over it. Their parent company censored at least one episode to try to prevent the possibility of violence over it. The show’s creators wanted to leave it in. Presenting them as cowards unwilling to mock Islam because they are afraid and they only choose “safe” targets is just wrong.

Now I need to go take a shower. I feel dirty for defending South Park.

 

[CV75]

20 hours ago, Notatbm said:

Well D &C 64:23 is pretty straightforward about burning non-tithepayers at the second coming: 

“23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice⁠, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.”

We also know that tithing or donating to any organization except for the lds church does not count as tithing. For example, I as a Mormon will not be considered a tithepayer if i choose to tithe to another church or NGO who accepts “tithing” or donations. If I do that and not pay a full ten percent of my “increase, income, interest” or whatever the standard is to the Mormon church, I will be burned at the second coming. 
 

the ad isn’t too far off. All non Mormons will burn at the second coming. Also all not full tithe paying Mormons will burn as well. 

 

Do you really think the graphic designer of this poster, or the theater goers it is to draw, have burning non-tithe payers at the second coming on top of mind? Would it still be funny to them (was it funny to you?). If it's funny enough to sell tickets, that is all that matters, right?

[Notatbm]

21 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

You do understand how patently false this statement is, correct?

Makes me wonder how much you actually understand concerning the doctrines of the Restoration.

I distinctly remember being taught that ALL churches are false and in apostacy, except for the Mormon church. Members of other churches are therefore apostates. Or kindling

[Notatbm]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

Do you really think the graphic designer of this poster, or the theater goers it is to draw, have burning non-tithe payers at the second coming on top of mind? Would it still be funny to them (was it funny to you?). If it's funny enough to sell tickets, that is all that matters, right?

No and that wasn’t the point. Another poster said we don’t teach fire and brimstone or some such thing. I’m provided proof of two prophets teaching that non tithepayers will be burned. Whether or not that is literal is beside the point. The creater of the playbill isn’t necessarily out of line with his art.  Some Mormons just choose to be offended by it. 

[Notatbm]

11 hours ago, bluebell said:

You kind of did though, because the implication of your post is that you can be a child sexual predator, a murderer, rapist, whatever most degenerite thing you can think of, but if you pay your tithing, you get to stay on the earth during the millennium with all the righteous.

I never even discussed any of those other types you mention. I spoke only of the non tithepayers. Don’t make up stuff I didn’t say. 

11 hours ago, bluebell said:

Your illustration is flawed though, because you've tried to take that one verse out of context.

According to scripture is is the wicked who will be burned at His second coming.  Will all non tithe payers be considered wicked? No, they won't.  Can a non tithe payer be considered wicked?  Yes, they can.  God will judge.

23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice⁠, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

I distinctly remember being taught that ALL churches are false and in apostacy, except for the Mormon church. Members of other churches are therefore apostates. Or kindling

So you haven't actually studied doctrine for yourself- you just rely on what you think you remember being taught?

Anyone ordained to live through the tribulations of the last days, who qualifies for Terrestrial glory, will live into the Millennium.

Why do you think there will continue to be missionary work in the Millennium?

Edited July 16, 2025 by ZealouslyStriving

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I distinctly remember being taught that ALL churches are false and in apostacy, except for the Mormon church. Members of other churches are therefore apostates. Or kindling

Technically no. If a religion is apostate and a member of that faith never belonged to a non-apostate version they wouldn’t be apostates, just heathens or non-believers or wrong or whatever.

We have stopped calling all other churches apostate though for reasons that aren’t clear to me. The optimist in me thinks it is a good sign of goodwill. The cynic in me thinks that we like being at the “big boy” table with the other churches and stopped saying unpleasant things because we sometimes get invited to their parties and want them to keep inviting us.

[Pyreaux]

3 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I distinctly remember being taught that ALL churches are false and in apostacy, except for the Mormon church. Members of other churches are therefore apostates. Or kindling

3 hours ago, Notatbm said:

No and that wasn’t the point. Another poster said we don’t teach fire and brimstone or some such thing. I’m provided proof of two prophets teaching that non tithepayers will be burned. Whether or not that is literal is beside the point. The creater of the playbill isn’t necessarily out of line with his art.  Some Mormons just choose to be offended by it. 

3 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I never even discussed any of those other types you mention. I spoke only of the non tithepayers. Don’t make up stuff I didn’t say. 

23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice⁠, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.

“All churches are false = all people in them are apostates = all apostates are damned?” This is a False Equivalence: You treat institutional apostasy (churches lacking authority) as equivalent to individual damnation, which is not doctrinally supported. LDS doctrine distinguishes between the apostasy of institutions and the individual worth and sincerity of believers in those institutions. Every person outside the Church is not considered wicked. That's not fire and brimstone preaching.

This Straw Man you built is a fake caricature of LDS belief (e.g., “only Mormons survive the Second Coming”) you rather argue against that rather than against actual Church doctrine, which teaches mercy and hope.

"Tithepayers won’t be burned = non-tithepayers and non-members will be burned” This is Affirming the Consequent: Just because tithing protects someone doesn’t mean a lack of tithing automatically condemns someone. A Premise: If A, then B. Invalid assumption: Not A, therefore Not B. This is a fallacy. The Church doesn’t train missionaries to preach of hell as their main message - quite the opposite. 

So, while the marketers and artists can do what they want, its a Tu Quoque (whataboutism) by pointing out LDS doctrine you perceive as “hellfire”-based, to justify avoiding the actual concern: the musical's ad bigotedly seeks to exploit religious imagery in a way that mocks a minority faith.

Claiming the playbill is fine and Mormons are just being sensitive ignores the possibility that: The ad is indeed offensive. Mormons can still feel how they feel about it without being hypersensitive. Misrepresentation can be harmful, especially to marginalized religious groups.

[Calm]

11 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

Claiming the playbill is fine and Mormons are just being sensitive ignores the possibility that: The ad is indeed offensive. Mormons can still feel how they feel about it without being hypersensitive. Misrepresentation can be harmful, especially to marginalized religious groups.

I don’t see why the ad is offensive even if it was based on misunderstanding of LDS doctrine***.  It seems a relatively generic portrayal of hell, after all.  Now if it was an intentional misrepresentation made to connect LDS with a more extreme religious viewpoint to present LDS as equally extreme or to make nonLDS believe our doctrine is less inclusive or hopeful than it actually is, that would be different.  But the idea of sinners burning in hell is hardly an extreme view, it’s a widespread Christian belief as far as I am aware, though I believe a large number of denominations also view such descriptions as metaphorical/symbolic.  Such an ad might even make some less aware individuals view LDS as more mainstream Christianity than it is.

Plus if the ad reflects a moment in the play that is a dream sequence, which apparently it does (which was unknown to me when I first posted this thread), it’s not even that odd of a choice.   It’s not even that unrealistic like much of the material in the play is (such as one of the Ugandans thinking a manual typewriter is a cell phone**** when iirc the time period the play is likely set in based on cultural references had 60% of Ugandans owning one, I did the research when the play was previously discussed on the board).  Many LDS would possibly be saturated in visuals representing hell as burning fires if they spent much time watching fantasy/horror shows or even cartoons** or just  hearing references in nonLDS Christian speech to the fires of hell; it would be hardly surprising for a LDS to have a dream featuring such a hell even if we don’t believe such actually exists.  I have no desire to go back and read the script to see if it presents the dream as representing real fears of the young elder or not, so I am not ruling out this still falls into the category of caricatures of our beliefs, but if it does, then the misrepresentation is the responsibility of the writers and not whoever came up with the ad campaign as I previously supposed when I thought this reference to hellfire a total creation of the ad people…unless by chance they are the same people, which seems unlikely.

**All Dogs Go to Heaven also has a hellfire dream sequence:  https://youtu.be/leCCjuw4GdE?si=uG6OPV66cNRW-Dlw

 

***my initial description was “odd” as I have never viewed the ad as inherently offensive as for me it would depend on the motivations for choosing such a detection, which cannot be known with the limited info given.  I find the musical itself highly offensive, though much, much more for its racial caricatures than for the religious ones, but that’s on the writers because they appear to me to be familiar enough with LDS beliefs and could easily have learned more if they desired so the misrepresentation/lampooning seems intentional to me.  I don’t transfer the intent to offend to others involved unless they know better and go along with the intention to misrepresent, but that is not something that can be seen with very limited evidence, such as this ad.

****apparently they got enough criticism for this offensive caricature that they modified the joke into something less stupid.  They made several other changes as well.  Here is an interesting discussion on Reddit about the changes.  It demonstrates that at least some of the audience understood the caricature of the Ugandans as representative of the racism/lack of actual cultural awareness and experience with African people/culture of Mormons, where my guess is LDS quite possibly have greater experience and awareness than the typical American due to the missionary outreach we do.

Quote

The whole point is that the Ugandans are portrayed as the Mormons see them, not as they are, so the exaggerated ignorance, the lack of any type of modernity, that’s all just through the Mormons eyes….

——

For me, it wasn't obvious enough that the Ugandans are shown through the eyes of Mormons.

——

EXACTLY! The predominant white audience is laughing as the ignorance of the Africans. Lines like I have Magots in my scrotom repeated over and over and the most horrendous "Raping babies to cure AIDS" isn't funny and portrays the Ugandians as savages! This is PUNCHING DOWN by the White privileged writers and producers. As a former black Actor I would be so ashamed every night having to perform that and having the white audience laughing AT me and my race! The African's are the disgraced butt of the Joke worshiping Elder Cunningham as their God. ——! I —— hated this show and found it DEEPLY Racist and offensive!! I am VERY curious of the changes made because the original should have never been made and all the praise is BS!

——

The central theme is that these privileged white American Jesus boys are oblivious to what real struggle is and are Incapable of confronting it. The Mormons are the butts of the jokes, not the Ugandans. Even with lines like "I have Maggots in my scrotum" the joke isn't "ha that poor black guy has maggots in his nuts". The joke is the Mormon guy is going on and on trying to convert these people to his church instead of providing actual tangible help to people who need it. The problems of the Ugandans are exaggerated for comedic effect, but primarily to showcase the obliviousness of the missionaries.

Be warned there is language, deleted in the above.  https://www.reddit.com/r/Broadway/comments/rlziqq/changes_made_to_the_book_of_mormon/

Btw, I don’t see viewing the musical as offensive as that controversial or biased since South Park is famous for being offensive (I have to go by reports since I have only seen a few clips from it, it’s not a style of entertainment I find funny or interesting in general).  It would be out of character for the creators to avoid intentional offense it seems to me.

Edited July 16, 2025 by Calm

[CV75]

14 hours ago, Notatbm said:

No and that wasn’t the point. Another poster said we don’t teach fire and brimstone or some such thing. I’m provided proof of two prophets teaching that non tithepayers will be burned. Whether or not that is literal is beside the point. The creater of the playbill isn’t necessarily out of line with his art.  Some Mormons just choose to be offended by it. 

Elder/President Nelson mentioned protection in the day of vengeance and burning (idiomatic scriptural term for God's wrath), and Elder Hinckley is quoting God (using a fuller quote from from scripture) to juxtapose the "fire insurance" humor (and he seems to appreciate the humor) with his more measured, "I'll be serious for a moment" personal attitude and opinion about the day of vengeance and burning. Whether the listener/reader (or the speaker) interprets "day of vengeance and burning" as literal, figurative, or maybe a little of both (depending), their representation of Church teachings carry a much more loving, warning, inviting tone than what most people associate with the "fire and brimstone" style of preaching that uses vivid, over-the-top descriptions to terrorize people into repentance. I think in a case like this, where the word of God can be presented in different styles, the practical religious message is as much in the spirit of delivery as it is in the text -- they provide each other a balanced context.

[bluebell]

16 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I never even discussed any of those other types you mention. I spoke only of the non tithe payers. Don’t make up stuff I didn’t say. 

23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice⁠, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.

My point is that one verse taken out of context doesn't mean anything though.  Taking one part out of a whole text and trying to use that one part to prove you are right is called proof-texting, and you can't base theology on it.

Yes, you spoke only of non-tithing payers but the implications of your post is that everyone who is a tithe payer will be considered righteous since they won't burn with the wicked.  That means that, according to the implications of your argument, someone who was a murderer but also paid tithing, would get to be with the righteous and not burned when Christ comes.

You've been trying to argue that we believe in the type of hell pictured in the OP and you've tried to use the verse above about tithing as proof.  I'm just explaining why that argument doesn't work because it's an argument that uses proof texting as it's base, and it completely falls apart when you reason it out to its conclusion.  

 

[Tacenda]

21 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I distinctly remember being taught that ALL churches are false and in apostacy, except for the Mormon church. Members of other churches are therefore apostates. Or kindling

Well actually, they are saved but they aren't exalted to be gods/godesses and procreate.

Edited July 17, 2025 by Tacenda

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Well actually, they are saved but they aren't exalted to be gods/godesses and procreate.

If they choose to accept the Gospel fully in the next life, they are exalted in the same way any Saint must choose to fully accept the Gospel or they will be unable to receive exaltation.

[teddyaware]

On 7/14/2025 at 9:15 PM, Notatbm said:

Well D &C 64:23 is pretty straightforward about burning non-tithepayers at the second coming: 

“23 Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice⁠, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.”

We also know that tithing or donating to any organization except for the lds church does not count as tithing. For example, I as a Mormon will not be considered a tithepayer if i choose to tithe to another church or NGO who accepts “tithing” or donations. If I do that and not pay a full ten percent of my “increase, income, interest” or whatever the standard is to the Mormon church, I will be burned at the second coming. 
 

the ad isn’t too far off. All non Mormons will burn at the second coming. Also all not full tithe paying Mormons will burn as well. 

 

As long as you acknowledge and equally condemn the Bible’s book of Malachi for its prophetic warning that the wicked and ungodly are going to be burned at Christ’s Second Coming, and that the ashes of those who are consumed by fire are going to be trodden under the feet of the righteous who survive the great conflagration, I’ll cut you some slack as I sit back in amusement beholding the spectacle of your paroxysms of ignorance while you “kick against the pricks.”

 

1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

2 ¶ But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts. (Malachi 4)

 

[The Nehor]

46 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

As long as you acknowledge and equally condemn the Bible’s book of Malachi for its prophetic warning that the wicked and ungodly are going to be burned at Christ’s Second Coming, and that the ashes of those who are consumed by fire are going to be trodden under the feet of the righteous who survive the great conflagration, I’ll cut you some slack as I sit back in amusement beholding the spectacle of your paroxysms of ignorance while you “kick against the pricks.”

 

 

1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be as stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

2 ¶ But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

3 And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts. (Malachi 4)

Your lust for vengeance is showing again.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, teddyaware said:

, I’ll cut you some slack as I sit back in amusement beholding the spectacle of your paroxysms of ignorance while you “kick against the pricks

Do you think God laughs when he sees his children taking paths he doesn’t want them to take?

[Tony uk]

Humour, in the correct context can be used as something of an ice breaker, in some circumstances.

 However, when humour is incorrectly used, and sows the seeds of mockery. Then it becomes God, and his word that becomes the figure of that mockery.