mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 I'll give it to you, that's a pretty decent workaround. All I know is that when I read this, it still doesn't feel right at all. What I feel in my heart is that every single one of us is procrastinating on our repentance in some way according to the definition of repentance as taught by leaders such as Kimball. Just think of one solitary sin in your life and ask yourself, did I really complete all the steps? When I am honest, the answer is no for a lot of sins. How does one make restitution for every single sin ever committed, for example? What about the sins we have we're not even aware of until they're pointed out to us? If you want to believe in a God that's not trying to "gotcha" on little technicalities like this, the LDS definition of repentance doesn't make a whole lot of sense. And then, with that in mind, verse 35 lays down the hammer. It kind of depends on how you see God- as a vengeful parent who wants to sabotage you or as a loving Father who wants to give you all the breaks he can. I choose the latter. If he really wanted us all to fry he would not have given us the atonement in the first place.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 You love to take these extreme and absolute positions. Repentance is a process. Are you suggesting that we cannot forsake our sins? Are you also suggesting that all sins are equal in degree? Is going 10km over the speed limit on the freeway as bad as murder? Taken into context, we cannot commit adultery, murder, or other serious crimes and say at the last day we tried to be better. We can and we must overcome serious sins. It is those that are due to human frailty that get us down. loosing our temper, failing to acknowledge someone, sleeping too late. Sins that should be mastered. I do make an effort to perfect myself. You make it sound like a bad thing. I do now worship a God who will cast someone out of heaven because they are poor housekeepers. Again, have you really read the Miracle of Forgiveness? These aren't my positions. They are those of one of your prophets. Making excuses for how serious a sin happens to be is seriously frowned upon. "I do now worship a God who will cast someone out of heaven because they are poor housekeepers." Also, do you really expect me to believe that the worst sin someone hasn't repented of is being a poor housekeeper? Lying, Lusting (aka Adultery), Coveting.. All the common goodies. Want me to admit I'm probably worse than you at some of these? Cuz I will..
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 You're missing the point. I agree with every single thing you said here, that's the problem. The teachings of the church on repentance do not align with the reality that we experience every time we slip back into any given sin. They say we MUST complete all the steps, one of those steps is to "forsake," which means "don't come back." So the question becomes, why can we not complete the steps even though we try so hard? And where are we left if we can't? I would submit to you that we are left with Alma 34:35. Your heartfelt view is much more EV and much less Miracle of Forgiveness. Thanks for being honest about your struggles btw. Miracle of Forgiveness is pretty much universally seen as overly harsh. We get to say things like that you know
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 It kind of depends on how you see God- as a vengeful parent who wants to sabotage you or as a loving Father who wants to give you all the breaks he can. I choose the latter. If he really wanted us all to fry he would not have given us the atonement in the first place.Good on you, I also choose the latter. I choose to try my hardest to continue rejecting sin more every day, but ultimately trust Christ. Now if we could only get Kimball to do the same.. Oh and maybe get rid of all those worthiness interviews..
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 ...The opinion of one prophet. And not really just his opinion. The steps of repentance are widely (albeit nominally) accepted. I think the problem is people don't want to actually be held accountable for following them strictly, because they realize, like you, that's kinda impossible. No the opinion of one man who was not acting as a prophet Big difference. Remember we are not fundamentalists as some EV's are.
Freedom Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 God being an exalted man. Two things. The word generation is in question among LDS, so I wouldn't use it to prove something if I were you. Second, you're not even referring to the correct temple. You're thinking of D&C 84, the Independence MO one. D&C 115, the Far West one is the one I was talking about. Where in the bible does it say God is not an exalted man?Where in d&C 115 is there a prophesy that a temple would be built? I have no idea what you are referring to by your 'warning' about the term generation.
The Nehor Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Again, have you really read the Miracle of Forgiveness? These aren't my positions. They are those of one of your prophets. Making excuses for how serious a sin happens to be is seriously frowned upon. "I do now worship a God who will cast someone out of heaven because they are poor housekeepers." Also, do you really expect me to believe that the worst sin someone hasn't repented of is being a poor housekeeper? Lying, Lusting (aka Adultery), Coveting.. All the common goodies. Want me to admit I'm probably worse than you at some of these? Cuz I will..So your argument is that our gospel is too hard so it cannot be true? Huh.....you know you and the young rich man who,asked Jesus what he lacked yet should get together for drinks some time.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 No the opinion of one man who was not acting as a prophet Big difference. Remember we are not fundamentalists as some EV's are.Oh so he took the trouble to write a book that people shouldn't really bother to apply? Also, the steps of repentance are widely accepted without his book anyway.
Freedom Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Again, have you really read the Miracle of Forgiveness? These aren't my positions. They are those of one of your prophets. Making excuses for how serious a sin happens to be is seriously frowned upon. "I do now worship a God who will cast someone out of heaven because they are poor housekeepers." Also, do you really expect me to believe that the worst sin someone hasn't repented of is being a poor housekeeper? Lying, Lusting (aka Adultery), Coveting.. All the common goodies. Want me to admit I'm probably worse than you at some of these? Cuz I will.. Uh. No. I am asking you if you believe that all sins are the same or if some sins are more serious than others. You have based your argument on the false premise that everything a prophet says is scripture. The book in question is not scripture. It was one book written by one man who had extreme positions on repentance that never became the teachings of the church even though he was at the head of it for many years. This is evidence that the church is led be revelation and that people who are called are not zombies.
Freedom Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Oh so he took the trouble to write a book that people shouldn't really bother to apply? Also, the steps of repentance are widely accepted without his book anyway. So you disagree with the steps of repentance? Do you not believe that we should change our character and strive to become better people? I am completely confused as to what you are trying to argue.
The Nehor Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 My point exactly. Anyone who has ever been burdened with any sort of sin in their lives has some sense of how this becomes a hopeless burden. You may not personally feel right now that you are in such a tight spot, but that doesn't make it any less real of a struggle. And remember, it might be your turn again soon. "But he can repent and start again" We as humans always find ourselves restarting do we not? Is this a form of procrastination? I suppose it is a matter of faith yet again, but I answer yes. Therefore, in a nutshell, this is why I reject the LDS doctrine of repentance and choose the EV version, which acknowledges the impossibility of complying with the Miracle of Forgivness, and provides a viable alternative, Christ.Yeah, our version does not really involve Christ. We should think about adding that.Oh no, wait, you are just lying to score rhetorical points. Better choose the right repentance method or you are doomed to the flames, mwahahahahhahahahahahahha!
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Where in the bible does it say God is not an exalted man?Where in d&C 115 is there a prophesy that a temple would be built? I have no idea what you are referring to by your 'warning' about the term generation. Numbers 23:19, Isaiah 43:10, Revelation 1:8, Lots of other places. Read it again, the whole thing is about it. I'm saying, I can show you a quote from Apostle Orson Pratt that says "generation," as used in D&C 84, meant physical generation. So you might want to straighten out which interpretation is correct before you try to make another important point based off it.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) ...The opinion of one prophet. And not really just his opinion. The steps of repentance are widely (albeit nominally) accepted. I think the problem is people don't want to actually be held accountable for following them strictly, because they realize, like you, that's kinda impossible. Yeah so we are all lying here because we figured out in advance that you would ask this question and we would all pretend that it is a straw man that we don't take seriously, and we are pretending that we don't really believe the book you are quoting. Pretty clever of us, huh? So clearly you are right about the harshest possible way of looking at Mormonism which is what we REALLY believe, because we all want to burn in hell forever. Dang. You figured it out. We are irrational member of a suicide cult who actually love pain and misery and want to inflict our horrible religion on everyone. Don't tell anyone, ok? Edited January 19, 2015 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 First, all was hypothetical, just saying what rules things would have to follow. I think the doctrinal changes are quite enough without even bringing prophecy into it. Second, no. Such as predicting a Far West MO temple and then not delivering on time. But I really can't discuss that again, or the mods will boot me for violations unknown. Prophets make mistakes. You dont seem to understand that we understand that. It's no biggie THAT is why we have to have our own testimonies of every principle.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Prophets make mistakes. You dont seem to understand that we understand that. It's no biggie THAT is why we have to have our own testimonies of every principle.You can't make a mistake when you speak for God. I will not now or ever back down from that. That makes God into a liar, which he is not.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 If you believe it's possible, then do it. Make restitution for all your sins, and forsake them all, etc etc. Simple as that... Or is it. What's the point of this? Do you think he is lying that he thinks he can do whatever he needs to do to be saved? I often disagree with Freedom but in this exchange with you he is right on the money with every word. Why do you think you understand what this stuff means better than we do?? It's totally irrational 1
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 You can't make a mistake when you speak for God. I will not now or ever back down from that. That makes God into a liar, which he is not. THAT is the problem You do not understand what that meansThat requires inerrant scriptures which we do not accept. So stick with your infallible bible then that you only say you accept by faith- so that means your belief that it is inerrant means YOU are inerrant in your interpretation. Good luck with that
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 So you disagree with the steps of repentance? Do you not believe that we should change our character and strive to become better people? I am completely confused as to what you are trying to argue. The steps are great ways to have an idea of what a repentant attitude looks like. But they cannot get you to salvation when you apply them like a checklist and do so religiously, if you'll pardon the pun. Show me the LDS scriptures that say God will excuse you for not completing your repentance.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 If the bible is inerrant and speaks for God you must have some proof that that is the case beyond your paltry fallible faith if you are going to impose that interpretation on others
Freedom Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Numbers 23:19, Isaiah 43:10, Revelation 1:8, Lots of other places. Read it again, the whole thing is about it. I'm saying, I can show you a quote from Apostle Orson Pratt that says "generation," as used in D&C 84, meant physical generation. So you might want to straighten out which interpretation is correct before you try to make another important point based off it. Numbers 23:19 actually proves you wrong. God is not a man that should lie.In other words, he is a man, just not a dishonest man. I am not a man that I would but much credibility in your arguments because you are being willfully deceptive and ignorant.Isaiah 43:10 So there is only one God for Israel, this has nothing to do with whether or not God and us are the same speciesRev 1:8 - So God is the beginning and the end. I am the beginning and the end of a major project at work. Does this mean I am not human? Now, this last point is why you are just being impossible. You know full well that this quote is not part of our doctrine but you are just obstinate. I don't' care what some past church leaders believed it means, you are being a hypocrite by demanding we have one definition but you can have another.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 THAT is the problem You do not understand what that meansThat requires inerrant scriptures which we do not accept. So stick with your infallible bible then that you only say you accept by faith- so that means your belief that it is inerrant means YOU are inerrant in your interpretation. Good luck with thatIf I ever find a case in the Bible where I am shown beyond a shadow of MY OWN doubt that it contains false prophecy, I will reject it on the same rule I am quoting you. That's a promise.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 You can't make a mistake when you speak for God. I will not now or ever back down from that. That makes God into a liar, which he is not. So you have perfect knowledge that the bible speaks for God and that it is translated perfectly and has no errors and you also have no reason to believe that but your faith. You have read all the bible scholarship about scholars not knowing who even wrote the bible and you know how it was all selected by men and debated what to include and not include and you still know it is inerrant because God cannot lie. This is totally circular. You have no argument.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Numbers 23:19 actually proves you wrong. God is not a man that should lie.In other words, he is a man, just not a dishonest man. I am not a man that I would but much credibility in your arguments because you are being willfully deceptive and ignorant.Isaiah 43:10 So there is only one God for Israel, this has nothing to do with whether or not God and us are the same speciesRev 1:8 - So God is the beginning and the end. I am the beginning and the end of a major project at work. Does this mean I am not human? Now, this last point is why you are just being impossible. You know full well that this quote is not part of our doctrine but you are just obstinate. I don't' care what some past church leaders believed it means, you are being a hypocrite by demanding we have one definition but you can have another. You have your interpretations, I have mine. He staked his salvation on it. I suppose that doesn't matter to you either, but what can I do.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 If I ever find a case in the Bible where I am shown beyond a shadow of MY OWN doubt that it contains false prophecy, I will reject it on the same rule I am quoting you. That's a promise. What is a "false prophecy"? It all hinges on your interpretation of true and false, what the prophecy meant, who made it, and that there should BE no "false prophecies". And your "OWN" doubt is the standard for the world. We should not believe what we believe because YOU say that we have "false prophecies" according to YOUR definitions?
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) You have your interpretations, I have mine.Fine- then there is no basis for discussion. You have your own reality. The bible is inerrant, but that can only be known by your personal faith. Fine. My own personal faith tells me something else. End of story I guess. Edited January 19, 2015 by mfbukowski
Recommended Posts