Storm Rider Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Moses 1 is, in my judgment, the bookend to the King Follett sermon. It is popular among some students of Mormonism to suggest that Joseph Smith's theology evolved over time. I thoroughly dispute that notion, and I submit that the concepts of the King Follett sermon from 1844 are discernible in the Book of Moses from 1830.I agree completely with you. Thank you for saying so. Those that try to make the Book of Mormon to be Trinitarian are only those that have not read and/or understood the Book of Mormon. Geez, I have grown to be a serious crank in my dotage.
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Those that try to make the Book of Mormon to be Trinitarian are only those that have not read and/or understood the Book of Mormon.The first Article of Faith may be a bit misleading.The first page of the Book of Mormon clears it up.
thesometimesaint Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 (edited) lachrymolotov:To murder is the illegally taking of a human life. God is a bit beyond our legal defintion. Further as God gives us our lives back for eternity we have lost nothing and in fact gained everything. Edited December 2, 2011 by thesometimesaint
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Killing innocent children and promoting genocide doesn't really work for anyone's attempted system of objective morality, I'm afraid.Sure, in terms of hypothetical this and that, it is easy enough to weasel your way around an argument, but the fact is that God has killed directly and ordered the killing of enough people to constitute being a mass murderer.
William Schryver Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Killing innocent children and promoting genocide doesn't really work for anyone's attempted system of objective morality, I'm afraid.Sure, in terms of hypothetical this and that, it is easy enough to weasel your way around an argument, but the fact is that God has killed directly and ordered the killing of enough people to constitute being a mass murderer.Well, it is, in the final analysis, all a question of perspective, isn't it?At any rate, call it what you will, nothing that God has done to date will compare to that which is yet to come:D&C 133O Lord, thou shalt come down to make thy name known to thine adversaries, and all nations shall tremble at thy presence—When thou doest terrible things, things they look not for;… And it shall be said: Who is this that cometh down from God in heaven with dyed garments; yea, from the regions which are not known, clothed in his glorious apparel, traveling in the greatness of his strength? And he shall say: I am he who spake in righteousness, mighty to save.And the Lord shall be red in his apparel, and his garments like him that treadeth in the wine-vat.And so great shall be the glory of his presence that the sun shall hide his face in shame, and the moon shall withhold its light, and the stars shall be hurled from their places.And his voice shall be heard: I have trodden the wine-press alone, and have brought judgment upon all people; and none were with me;And I have trampled them in my fury, and I did tread upon them in mine anger, and their blood have I sprinkled upon my garments, and stained all my raiment; for this was the day of vengeance which was in my heart.And now the year of my redeemed is come; and they shall mention the loving kindness of their Lord, and all that he has bestowed upon them according to his goodness, and according to his loving kindness, forever and ever.Therefore it is written:Ecclesiastes 1213 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.And finally:D&C 88104 ... this shall be the sound of his trump, saying to all people, both in heaven and in earth, and that are under the earth—for every ear shall hear it, and every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess, while they hear the sound of the trump, saying: Fear God, and give glory to him who sitteth upon the throne, forever and ever; for the hour of his judgment is come.
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 (edited) Would a message from the Holy Ghost hold up in a court of law as evidence?Case and point. A court of law has no jurisdiction over the atonement. Also, it is my understanding that a court of law generally determines whether a law is being broken vs abided or possibly whether one exists. What does a court of law have to do with this? We are discussing the atonement not the crucifixion of Jesus. What law would bring this matter to a court? Is someone forcing salvation on us? No. Which is why you have to ask for the truth of it.add:http://lds.org/scriptures/gs/holy-ghost.p3?lang=eng&letter=h Edited December 2, 2011 by Nominee
William Schryver Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 The first Article of Faith may be a bit misleading.The first page of the Book of Mormon clears it up.So something written in 1830 clarifies something written in 1842?
mfbukowski Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Just for grins and giggles. I wanted to quote what I consider the three most salient posts of the entire thread.Glad to know that even though you have left the church you still find good there somewhere
mfbukowski Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Oh. You know what? I have not read through this thread. It is late and I'm not entirely clear so if this fact has already been covered, I do apoligize. In fact, with this thread being eight pages in I am sure someone must have brought up how free agency may be working against us when bad things happen by now. Again, sorry for coming in off the hook.Hey - give yourself a break!No one reads what elguanteloko says anyway!
KevinG Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 No need to take anything out of the Bible or of the BoM; no need to get controversial in those areas. Let's simply assume (and you'll agree with me) that God has permitted many many many crimes to be committed against innocents. That's enough for the moment.You may not assume I agree with you that God has permitted many many crimes to be committed against innocents. Your original assertion was that God was not moral. Find an example from the scriptures to support this and we can have an adult discussion. Otherwise I will "simply assume" you can't come up with an example of God acting immorally.
KevinG Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 What jurisdiction allows Mormon revelation as evidence?The judgement bar of God. 1
KevinG Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Killing innocent children and promoting genocide doesn't really work for anyone's attempted system of objective morality, I'm afraid.Sure, in terms of hypothetical this and that, it is easy enough to weasel your way around an argument, but the fact is that God has killed directly and ordered the killing of enough people to constitute being a mass murderer.You are free to join my CFR to El Loko to show in the scriptures where God has murdered or committed an immoral act. Please do so in context so we can have a real adult discussion and not just bandy about assertion after assertion.
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Hey - give yourself a break!No one reads what elguanteloko says anyway! Thanks! but, well, I was feeling hot-headed. I can't believe anyone can blame God for our actions just because he has the power to stop them.
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 (edited) The judgement bar of God.I concur.Still, lachrymolotov:I questioned first how we went from proof of the atonement to a court of law. Now I question how we went from the witness of the Holy Ghost to Mormon revelation??edit: added lachrymolotov's name so that he may see fit to answer. Edited December 2, 2011 by Nominee
William Schryver Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Glad to know that even though you have left the church you still find good there somewhereSelek has left the church? I didn't know that. In fact, I don't believe it. What makes you think he left the church?
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 It may be a matter of perspective, but it can be very relevant when one group of people get spiritual confirmation that other people of different beliefs need to be killed. Oddly enough, this tends to coincide with the desire to get rich.I would posit that God does not exist, and so I do not concern myself with what may or may not happen when the Judgment finally comes. Either way, it is a common argument that compares the actions of the God of Abraham to the actions of a psychopath. Ultimately, actions speak louder than any words. Religion doesn't tend to make better people, which is another great reason to be skeptical of their sources of spiritual inspiration. If religious people really had access to communication with any kind of spirit that was meant to guide them to do good, we could assume that those people would tend to be better than everyone else... and they are not.I asked the question about the court of law to demonstrate a point about the reliability of information. Unfortunately, that point seems to be lost and you are going on about things that are entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Two different people of the same religion can get two different "inspired" answers. Two people of two different religions who both claim to "know" anything through the same mechanisms can end up with opposing answers, as well. Who are we to believe? Both people claim they have divine inspiration, yet both people have different answers. This is why spiritual information is unreliable and does not constitute proof. So, while you may say the Holy Ghost allows you to "know" something, the truth is that is not the case at all.When the Articles of Faith were written have absolutely nothing to do with what I said... otherwise I would have included the date. Non-members can easily misinterpret the 1st Article of Faith... even many young members misinterpret it. If you would bother to read the very first page of the Book of Mormon, you can see where the ambiguity disappears. This is a non-issue, really, and the fact that anyone wants to argue it demonstrates that your priorities in debate are a bit off. So, reread the context, pull out a Book of Mormon and check for yourself.
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Exodus 12:2929 Now it came about at midnight that the Lord struck all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh who sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the dungeon, and all the firstborn of cattle.
Deborah Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 lachrymolotov said:It may be a matter of perspective, but it can be very relevant when one group of people get spiritual confirmation that other people of different beliefs need to be killed. Oddly enough, this tends to coincide with the desire to get rich.What the heck does that mean? CFR.
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 It means that war is waged to gain wealth. Do you really disbelieve such a thing happens?
Deborah Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Selek has left the church? I didn't know that. In fact, I don't believe it. What makes you think he left the church?That's what I was going to say!
Deborah Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 It means that war is waged to gain wealth. Do you really disbelieve such a thing happens?What does that have to do with the morality of God since it is men who start wars?
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Because men start wars in the name of God. Deuteronomy 7:1-2:"... the seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them."
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 What does that have to do with the morality of God since it is men who start wars?The argument I am hearing is that the wars are God's fault since he has the power to stop us.
lachrymolotov Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 You may want to adjust your hearing aid.
Nominee Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 Because men start wars in the name of God.Deuteronomy 7:1-2:"... the seven nations greater and mightier than thou; And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them."I thought you just stated your claim to be, quote: "It means that war is waged to gain wealth." ?
Recommended Posts