The Nehor Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 it's a troll war between me and himFalse equivalency.
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 This absolutely does not fall into the category of revelation. And for proof of this I point you to the talk by Elder Packer in 2010. Watch the first couple minutes where he talks about The Proclamation. Compare the transcript after things were edited by correlation committee vs the video. Care to take a shot at explaining why The Proclamation was demoted by the correlation committee from a "revelation" to a "guide?" https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/cleansing-the-inner-vessel?lang=eng The Proclamation, a document developed through prayerful council which included all the apostles, subsequently signed by every member of the FP/Q12, printed and hung on the living room walls in members homes, etc. If even this isn't considered "revelation," it's pretty laughable to try and pass off lowing the age for missionaries as revelation. This isn't to say that The Proclamation isn't inspired to a certain extent, but the issue is the confidence interval. Apparently not high enough to call it a "revelation." This!!!!
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 1) Almost from the very beginning, it has been common knowledge in the Church that the prophet Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage. So the lie you say you were told by your young men's leader has nothing to do with the Church at large. Painting the entire Church with the broad brush claim of systemic lying about Joseph Smith's polygamy, all because of the alleged lie of your young men's leader, is as unfair as it is ridiculous. Anger clouds reason. 2) You need to understand that it was very logical for pre-Official Declaration 2 LDS apologists to presume blacks were being denied the priesthood because of their lack of faithfulness in the preexistence. Why? because Alma 13 testifies that the faithful in the premortal world are rewarded for their faithfulness by being made recipients of the priesthood power while in mortality. So the logical flip-side of this same Book of Mormon doctrine is that the priesthood would be denied to those on earth who were less valiant in the premortal world. So then, the pre-1978 LDS apologists should be charitably cut some slack because in the light of the Book of Mormon their presumptions of premortal unworthiness were perfectly logical and consistent with LDS scripture. But the fact is that since 1978 black male members HAVE BEEN able to hold the priesthood, so the perfectly logical and reasonable pre-1978 application of Alma 13 to the priesthood ban has since that time been cast into some doubt. But remember, in spite of what some wishful thinkers want to believe, the Church hasn't walked away from the legitimacy of the priesthood ban and for the need of a special revelation to end the ban. So aside from the once-presumed logical and scripturally presumed reason for the institution of the priesthood ban being called into question, nothing else has changed with regard to the ban. In its recent official statement on this subject, the Church stands by the need for a special revelation to end the ban. There would have been no need for a revelation to end the priesthood ban if there were no legitimate ban in the first place. And it's important to understand that the leaders who were present at the time the 1978 revelation was given have most solemnly testified that they did indeed receive a powerful revelation on that happy day -- a revelation as great as the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. The spiritually immature will always gag and choke on the meatier doctrines and principles of the Restore Gospel. Even so, of late the Church has made an attempt to masticate that Gospel meat for easier digestion. But in spite of the Church's best efforts, some are still choking. It will ever be so. Ahh,...the old spiritually immature wrap up! You bet. You have some special insight or knowledge that the rest of us skeptics don't have or have lost. You are jus so special. Really? What pious nonsense. This just like me saying you ignore evidence and reason and seek for confirmation bias.... which I guess if I play your game... you do.
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 The internet with all it's information can be very damaging to members and so can traumatic moments in people's lives that really test their faith. All I can suggest is to build your testimony on rock, not sand. What if the sand is the LDS Church?
Calm Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 I'm not sure how you expect to learn from it if you haven't read it in over a year.You misread him: " I haven't done cover to cover in a over a year though, but I've read portions of it as recently as a few days ago."
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not. Baseless platitudes. Can the believers deal in facts and evidences please?
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 The things of God always have been and always will be foolishness to the natural man. The natural man will inevitably find himself in a state of perplexity and utter incredulity as he observes what he sincerely believes to be the nonsensical antics of those who in reality are being led by the Spirit of God. The natural man will always champion rationality and reason over faith and hope. And so with sneering contempt he will decry from the window of a large and spacious building what he is certain is the childish gullibility of those who in truth have learned for themselves that the improbable is the probable in the kingdom of God.The natural man will confidently play the odds, certain of victory because the laws of probability are so very much in his favor. But just as the enemies of the Son of God confidently played the odds that a man named Jesus, from an insignificant backwater Galilean town called Nazareth, was just another charlatan in a long list of Messianic pretenders, so too the natural man of the 21st century will confidently play the odds that a man named Jeffery R Holland, from an "irrelevant" town called Salt Lake City, speaks only for himself and not for God. But like the proverbial starving man who devours a sumptuous feast in his sleep, the natural man of the 21st century will awake from his delicious and satisfying dream as one dissatisfied, famished and desolate. Another "We are special and unless you do things to become special well..... you are just a corrupted natural man and will never understand." This is what you call a thinking stopper approach. 1
Duncan Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 Baseless platitudes. Can the believers deal in facts and evidences please? some people apply themselves to understanding things and some people don't
Teancum Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 some people apply themselves to understanding things and some people don't So you must be one of the special ones as well I guess.
Duncan Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 So you must be one of the special ones as well I guess. not to humble brag buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut! you can too! we ALL learn line upon line precept upon precept
Bobbieaware Posted February 14, 2015 Posted February 14, 2015 Another "We are special and unless you do things to become special well..... you are just a corrupted natural man and will never understand." This is what you call a thinking stopper approach.Why do you seem to react with disdain when a member of the church only does what's always been expected of a believer in the church? It's as if you're saying, "I know a believer in Mormonism is expected to believe in Mormonism, but why don't they think more like apostates?" It's as if a believing member of the church asks himself, "why don't those who've lost the Spirit not think and behave as if they still have the Spirit?" Believing members of the church are going to believe the scriptures and the words of the prophets before they believe the works of so-called scholars who are not even motivated by faith. Why the apparent expectation that believing members should put aside their testimonies and think and act more like those who have lost their faith? 1
Avatar4321 Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 (Face Palm)You've just summed up every attempt to have a rational conversation with you on the matter.Tell me, for those who regularly.receive revelation and see miracles, how is it rational to throw it all away because Joseph Smith had multiple wives? 1
Teancum Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 Why do you seem to react with disdain when a member of the church only does what's always been expected of a believer in the church? It's as if you're saying, "I know a believer in Mormonism is expected to believe in Mormonism, but why don't they think more like apostates?" It's as if a believing member of the church asks himself, "why don't those who've lost the Spirit not think and behave as if they still have the Spirit?" Believing members of the church are going to believe the scriptures and the words of the prophets before they believe the works of so-called scholars who are not even motivated by faith. Why the apparent expectation that believing members should put aside their testimonies and think and act more like those who have lost their faith?I have no disdain. I was where you are. Why do believing members when challenged often accuse the challenger of disdain? Why do believers plead special insight by supernatural means when discussing this with a skeptic and expect the skeptic to just say ok? My comments often mirror others. You and others say that only the humble and spiritual will know and except the things of God, I have no disdain when I say I find that a conversation and critical thinking stopper. What else is it? But I do understand it and why you say it because I have been there. My exploration and truth seeking has now led me to a place where at least for me I need more than that. Telling me the natural man is an enemy to God and only those who are obedient and humble enough to have the spirit and they and only they get it does seem like special pleading to me.And oh by the way pray. A lot. I ask for answers. I say I will go and do what you want. I think I am humble in these requests. But for q long time I just get silence. So am I flawed? 1
Duncan Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 I have no disdain. I was where you are. Why do believing members when challenged often accuse the challenger of disdain? Why do believers plead special insight by supernatural means when discussing this with a skeptic and expect the skeptic to just say ok? My comments often mirror others. You and others say that only the humble and spiritual will know and except the things of God, I have no disdain when I say I find that a conversation and critical thinking stopper. What else is it? But I do understand it and why you say it because I have been there. My exploration and truth seeking has now led me to a place where at least for me I need more than that. Telling me the natural man is an enemy to God and only those who are obedient and humble enough to have the spirit and they and only they get it does seem like special pleading to me.And oh by the way pray. A lot. I ask for answers. I say I will go and do what you want. I think I am humble in these requests. But for q long time I just get silence. So am I flawed? something i've learned is what precisely are you asking, why are you asking, what research have you done on the topic-I learned that in a History course in university.
Teancum Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 something i've learned is what precisely are you asking, why are you asking, what research have you done on the topic-I learned that in a History course in university.I am not sure I want to spell it all out here but is there a one true religion, which one, how can I know or is there not. Also I pray to know if God is real, was JESUS his son. Why? Is that not evident? I want to know the truth. I have poured thousands of hours into study of the topics.
Duncan Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) I am not sure I want to spell it all out here but is there a one true religion, which one, how can I know or is there not. Also I pray to know if God is real, was JESUS his son. Why? Is that not evident? I want to know the truth. I have poured thousands of hours into study of the topics. for sure and I don't want to give you a "If a son shall ask bread of any of you that is a father, will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will he for a fish give him a serpent" Luke 11:11- Obviously I am not God and I don't know you but you seem sincere and I wish you well in your quest. I can only say what I have been given and what I don't know. there are things in my life that I have AGONIZED over for years and have gotten nothing, for which reason I don't know. BUT I just have to keep going on what I do know Edited February 15, 2015 by Duncan 2
The Nehor Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 So you must be one of the special ones as well I guess.Yes. Care to join me? 1
Teancum Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) Yes. Care to join me?Nah based on your example I will pass. ;-) Edited February 15, 2015 by Teancum
Hamba Tuhan Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) I was where you are ... But I do understand it and why you say it because I have been there. With all due respect, I don't for one second believe you've been where I am. The only direct route from where I am to where you suggest you are is either madness or evilness, and, charitably, I refuse to believe you are either mad or evil. I am willing to accept that we've had very different experiences in the Church and that your choices are therefore rational within your framework of experience, but that's a far different assessment than your clear implication that the rest of us are somehow less-evolved versions of you. Edited February 15, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan 3
Teancum Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 (edited) With all due respect, I don't for one second believe you've been where I am. The only direct route from where I am to where you suggest you are is either madness or evilness, and, charitably, I refuse to believe you are either mad or evil. I am willing to accept that we've had very different experiences in the Church and that your choices are therefore rational within your framework of experience, but that's a far different assessment than your clear implication that the rest of us are somehow less-evolved versions of you.Wow and I am told I post with disdian.Well clearly nobody has been exactly where anyone else has been since we are all different. My point really is I have been a full beleiving and passionately testimony bearing Latter Day Saint and that for the majority of my life, I served a mission, married in the temple, raised my children doing all the things the church teaches we should do in our families best we could, served in every calling I ever had including many leadership and was a hobby apologist. In fact I started posting on the predecessor to this board as such. I made many of the same arguments beleivers do, often referred to Paul and the verse from Corinthians about the things of God only being understood by the things of the spirit as well as the verse from Mosiah about the natural man being an enemy to God, I am I think well read in the scriptures as well as church history and other religious books . Look I am not sure how you or any others think I think I am more evolved or my assessment is better or in a more positive trajectory than yours or others. In fact I often acknowledge I may be wrong. I have said that while now I am a skeptic I still seek for truth. It may be the LDS church is what it claims. Today I highly doubt it and i think the evidence is agains it but I may well be wrong. And beleive me that is and has been very painful for me.The only time I really I think respond strongly is when the beleivers here post things to me or other skeptics or non beleivers like the idea that we just de some how not spiritual or humble enough to understand these things and other similar quips. That is it. Maybe that is where accusations like yours and others come from. Maybe I do post with arrogance or disdain more than I think. I will try to do better. But I do think the second sentence of your post is absolute nonesense, Edited February 15, 2015 by Teancum
Thinking Posted February 15, 2015 Author Posted February 15, 2015 You've just summed up every attempt to have a rational conversation with you on the matter.Tell me, for those who regularly.receive revelation and see miracles, how is it rational to throw it all away because Joseph Smith had multiple wives? Tell me how it's rational to not at least reconsider after finding out that that Joseph Smith had multiple wives - especially knowing the details.
Avatar4321 Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 Tell me how it's rational to not at least reconsider after finding out that that Joseph Smith had multiple wives - especially knowing the details.so we should ignore our personal revelations from God and the miracles we've seen and participated in just because we learn she learn something about josephs relationships?why on earth should something others do or don't do influence my relationship with God? Does Joseph being sealed to several women mean I should somehow ignore God when He says Joseph is a prophet and more importantly that Jesus is the Christ?I don't see why we should ignore our personal experiences with God because you say someone else made a mistake. Especially when it's questionable whether it was really a mistake? It is not rational at all. 1
Calm Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 Tell me how it's rational to not at least reconsider after finding out that that Joseph Smith had multiple wives - especially knowing the details.Possibly reconsider things about Joseph, sure. Reconsider things about my personal relationship with God, don't see why any more than finding out about Joseph's marriages would lead me to wonder about my relationship with my husband.
Teancum Posted February 15, 2015 Posted February 15, 2015 so we should ignore our personal revelations from God and the miracles we've seen and participated in just because we learn she learn something about josephs relationships?why on earth should something others do or don't do influence my relationship with God? Does Joseph being sealed to several women mean I should somehow ignore God when He says Joseph is a prophet and more importantly that Jesus is the Christ?I don't see why we should ignore our personal experiences with God because you say someone else made a mistake. Especially when it's questionable whether it was really a mistake? It is not rational at all.It is absolutely rational to reevaluate personal spiritual or metaphysical experiences Mormonism calls revelation in light of new information that may not have been had when one experienced them. It seems irrational not to do so at least. You may still end up interpreting them the same way and you may not.I do not know the nature of your experiences that you call revelation and miracles. Maybe they were more powerful for you than mine though I have had a few significant ones that I still beleive have meaning to me but is a different way than I used to.
Recommended Posts