Bill “Papa” Lee Posted September 12, 2007 Posted September 12, 2007 The Church offered an official apology for MMM details in the link:http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695209108,00.htmlFor the goodhearted, an apology will do...for the bitter no apology (However well worded will do!Pa Pa
thesometimesaint Posted September 12, 2007 Posted September 12, 2007 Pa Pa:I sorta agree. But what would the Church proper be apologizing for?
Severian Posted September 12, 2007 Posted September 12, 2007 If the Deseret News says an apology was offered, why was this statement issued by the official Church spokesman to the Associated Press? "Church leaders were adamant that the statement should not be construed as an apology. 'We don't use the word 'apology.' We used 'profound regret,'' church spokesman Mark Tuttle told The Associated Press."And why be adamant that no apology was actually issued?
katherine the great Posted September 12, 2007 Posted September 12, 2007 If the Deseret News says an apology was offered, why was this statement issued by the official Church spokesman to the Associated Press? And why be adamant that no apology was actually issued?Legal reasons would be my guess...
Thinking Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 Some sins are not covered by the atonement of Christ.1 John 1:7-9"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
Zeta-Flux Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 Thinking,*If we walk in the light.*Does the blood of Christ cover the sins of those who do not walk in the light?
Thinking Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 Thinking,*If we walk in the light.*Does the blood of Christ cover the sins of those who do not walk in the light?Since we have all sinned at least once, we have all walked in the darkness at least once. The three verses do not classify sins, but only our attitude as a sinner."If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."We must repent and "walk in the light." Unless "all" means something else, Christ's blood can pay for any sin if the sinner truly repents, and He will be the judge.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 The blood of Christ covers all.LOL. Wrong!Since we have all sinned at least once, we have all walked in the darkness at least once. The three verses do not classify sins, but only our attitude as a sinner."If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."We must repent and "walk in the light." Unless "all" means something else, Christ's blood can pay for any sin if the sinner truly repents, and He will be the judge.I guess the Bible condraticts its self then.
Zeta-Flux Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 Mola Ram Suda Ram,Your one-liner replies do not help the discussion. You might consider a different tact.------------------------------------Thinking,I agree that we have all walked in the darkness at least once. However, you did not answer my question. I asked whether the blood of Christ covers the sins of those who do not walk in the light. That we have *previously* walked in the darkness is evident. Whether Christ pays for the sins of those who presently continue to walk in darkness and/or not confess their sins, is what I am asking about.Here is how I understand Brigham. He is saying that those who *shed innocent blood/murder* need, in order to walk in the light, to be willing to give up their own lives as a penalty for their sins. At that point, the murderer truly forsakes the sin.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted September 13, 2007 Posted September 13, 2007 Mola Ram Suda Ram,Your one-liner replies do not help the discussion. You might consider a different tact.You are correct. I should have postulated more. I just like responding to one liners with one liners. Equally they are worthless.It has been noted that denying the HG is an unpardonable sin. Lets look at Judas Iscariot. He had the full light and yet he knew who Christ was. Is he going to heaven to be saved? No! Christ calles him a son of perdition. What is a Son of Perdition?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.