CV75 Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 It was cleared up but not 100% where I would be in agreementI don't think it is reasonable for you expect to be in agreement when you come out of the gate with an assumption of "wishful thinking and hoping or typical American arrogance." The only way to come to terms with the Restored Gospel is with the approach the missionaries offer (Moroni 10:3-7).
thesometimesaint Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 As you can tell we all have our own personalities here. Most of the time it's for the good, sometimes it isn't.
CV75 Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Which funny enough my old church thought the same thing.We teach it with utmost humility.
Calm Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 . Its simply a personality clash.If it is simply a personality clash, then perhaps you should consider that few (if any) others have interpreted bluebell's comments over the years as "arrogant" and perhaps therefore you are reading more into them then is there. That what you are reading is simple miscommunication of the strength of her faith. (I am assuming you don't believe strong faith is inherently wrong, though it is important that we place that faith in truth).Perhaps your prior experience with how your previous church viewed itself as "the one true church" is colouring how you are reading her words. 4
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 I don't think it is reasonable for you expect to be in agreement when you come out of the gate with an assumption of "wishful thinking and hoping or typical American arrogance." The only way to come to terms with the Restored Gospel is with the approach the missionaries offer (Moroni 10:3-7).I dont think all your young people sbould be missionaries. The very first ime I contacted the LDS church 2007/2008 after leaving the miltary they sent two young girls who were seriously lacking.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 We teach it with utmost humility.You may and that is the right way to go about it. But not everyone in your ward would.
bluebell Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 You see the thing is there are billions of people on this planet and unfortunately we are not going to get along with every one of them. And facebook wont let you have that many friends anyway.I dont hate the poster in question as I do not hate anyone. Its simply a personality clash. I came on his forum to learn a little bit more and ease some of the conversations I am having with an elder on facebook.I dont expect the red carpet treatment bit I dont have to feel harrased that every time I make a post, a certain poster is going to swoop down with their arrogance at being apart of tone one true church. Which funny enough my old church thought the same thing. I was sincerely trying to answer your questions as kindly as i knew how, as well as to engage some of your own beliefs on the topics you have posted about. I am fine with not responding to you any further though as it appears you have not been able to discern my intentions. I wish you well. Good luck here with the other posters.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 If it is simply a personality clash, then perhaps you should consider that few (if any) others have interpreted bluebell's comments over the years as "arrogant" and perhaps therefore you are reading more into them then is there. That what you are reading is simple miscommunication of the strength of her faith. (I am assuming you don't believe strong faith is inherently wrong, though it is important that we place that faith in truth).Perhaps your prior experience with how your previous church viewed itself as "the one true church" is colouring how you are reading her words.Or maybe some people let things slide and dont want to bring it to attention. My gf does that she will listen not agree but she rather just move on than discuss points that she felt offended her or her beliefs. Where as I do. It may stem from the fact I am one of 9 siblings and to be heard and validated you had to have the ability to speak up.While my church may have felt it as we taugh to be on fire for God and his words we did not slf righteos slap someone about who was not part of our church.
Calm Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Missionaries are meant to invite people to seek out the Spirit for the answers, not to give all the answers themselves.And the Lord has required of us that we be witnesses for Him.If you prefer an older couple or perhaps someone from the local ward or stake who is knowledgable in certain areas, you can make a request to be sent these and if they are available, they will be sent.But missionaries are there to teach primarily those interested in at least investigating whether they want to join the Church, not for all interested in investigating the Church for knowledge's sake even if learning is always a worthy goal. (this board, for example, is to discuss the LDS faith and community primarily and proselyting is not encouraged and can get someone banned if taken to excess for the board). Iow, we don't believe that we need missionaries who are well informed in theological or historical issues, but rather those who listen to the Spirit and thus are able to help others listen to it as well. 1
Calm Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Or maybe some people let things slide and dont want to bring it to attention.She has 16,000ish posts. I highly doubt that everyone in all that time would let it slide, especially given that many of those who have interacted with bluebell have been perfectly willing to call out others on perceived arrogance.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 Yes we arecall called to witness. And sometimes they something like sharing what Jesus has done in your lofe. And from there you can explain to them more about Jesus and his teachings. And I am aware missionaries are trained before they go out into the field.But if they dont know the answer instead of responding like this "Why do you want to know that. Just pray about the Book of Mormn we are not here to discuss this or that. Comes off as sloppy.I would rather they say "im sorry that is something I/we dont know much about. If you like we xan get in touch with someone who does. No one is asking missionaries to be perfect.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 She has 16,000ish posts. I highly doubt that everyone in all that time would let it slide, especially given that many of those who have interacted with bluebell have been perfectly willing to call out others on perceived arrogance.Well nobody is perfect. And I say she did.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Maybe the revelation was wrong. When God returns to reign on Earth. We are no longer going to be seperated by countires. All nationalistic pride will no longer be needed. As we will be one people worsbipping the One true God.Wll if if not in the Bible to corroborate such a claim than its incorrect.The new Zion (as you called it) will not be in the Holy Land, that where he will rule from...Gov't of the world will be from the new...
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 29, 2014 Author Posted January 29, 2014 Papa the new Zion as I called it was mentioned in the articles of faith. Otherwise I would not have used that word But as I said earlier someone has already explained it in a way I find satifactionarly.
Popular Post Flyonthewall Posted January 30, 2014 Popular Post Posted January 30, 2014 Wow... for someone to declare that Bluebell comes off as snarky or arrogant, I would have thought it would be the same as stating Ghandi was a violent man... Inconceivable! 5
CV75 Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 I dont think all your young people sbould be missionaries. The very first ime I contacted the LDS church 2007/2008 after leaving the miltary they sent two young girls who were seriously lacking.But that has more to do with I Corinthians 1:27 than with the message from Moroni 10:3-7. I would invite you to not allow your judgement of them as sisters in Christ to detract you from applying it.
CV75 Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 You may and that is the right way to go about it. But not everyone in your ward would.But your search is not about me, and not about everyone in my ward; it is about you.
Calm Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 Inconceivable!That was the word I was looking for. Well done!
Coreyb Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) You may and that is the right way to go about it. But not everyone in your ward would.we Mormons aren't accountable for what our coreligionists do/preach, see article of faith 2 "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression". Yes this doctrine does seem a little nationalistic, but hey, cant we argue that all Christians are a little to arrogant about Christ returning to Jerusalem? He already went there once! And why is it that only they get a Temple? Edited January 30, 2014 by Coreyb 1
rodheadlee Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 Where does it corroborate in the Bible that the new Zion and control seat of power will be in the Americas?Is this just wishful thinking and hoping or typical American arrogance?Are you here to learn or just stir up trouble and discontent?
slamarwi Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 Hi PtolemyGlenn, After having read this entire thread, it seems that there is a translation or interpretation gap regarding the lovely and talented Bluebell. I have read the board almost daily (though I seldom post) for several years and I assure you that "snarky" and/or "arrogant" are not typical adjectives that describe Bluebell. We have our moments, but for the most part we seek to be genuine and kindly constructive. SLW 1
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 30, 2014 Author Posted January 30, 2014 Are you here to learn or just stir up trouble and discontent?I am here to learn. But I am not here to be blindsides or manipulated. Due to issues in my past in regards to religion I approach in a more guarded way. To protect myself.
PtolemyGlenn Posted January 30, 2014 Author Posted January 30, 2014 Hi PtolemyGlenn, After having read this entire thread, it seems that there is a translation or interpretation gap regarding the lovely and talented Bluebell. I have read the board almost daily (though I seldom post) for several years and I assure you that "snarky" and/or "arrogant" are not typical adjectives that describe Bluebell. We have our moments, but for the most part we seek to be genuine and kindly constructive. SLWWell in my case that s what I felt. People really cant dismiss another persons feelngs as you are not in my body to feel them.Whatever the case, the poster in question has advised they will no longer respond to me. That makes mechappy, they are happy and the issue has been dealt with.I appreciate your love and concern for your friend, but I know how I feel and pushing by anyone else on this resolved issue borders on bullying.
Calm Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) I highly doubt that bluebell is happy about having to limit her posting in order to avoid interacting with you, even if she is kind and generous enough to do so.And her feelings and everyone else's are as real as yours. Any reason why we should allow your feelings to dictate our actions to the point of not discussing things we believe need to be discussed, like defending the character of a good person?The board has a report function, you should use it if you believe there is incivility or bullying here. It is meant for that purpose. Edited January 30, 2014 by calmoriah
Tacenda Posted January 30, 2014 Posted January 30, 2014 Sometimes we as LDS might come off as self righteous. But that's not what we are, usually. Just appear that way to the non-LDS. And we are all conversing in word only on the board, leaving out tone can can make a world of difference. Thank goodness for emoticons. I left one off, and people thought I was serious.
Recommended Posts