Tribune Op Ed: Section 132 In Seminary This Week

[Teancum]

3 Nephi and the flood of Noah suggest that mass murder can be okay. God does not appear to like it but He is okay with doing it if needed. Usually God takes care of such things himself for which I am grateful but I know of no promise that God would never ask such a thing of his people. The Law of War given in the Doctrine and Covenants allows for God to tell his people to attack an enemy.

 

I intend to create Lothlorien and people it with elves when I have the power of the gods. As time is relative therefore they exist now and therefore destroying angels do too. Checkmate.

 

Actually revelation that tells you to do bad things probably comes from good old Satan's flunkies. God telling his people to do things that seem bad but that he knows are good......that can be not fun but does happen.

 

 

1:  If you believe the flood is a historical event and 3 Nephi's account of mass destruction well ok.  Your God is a mass murderer I guess.

 

2:  I have not idea how you can even think item 2 is a checkmate unless you are just having fun.

 

3:  People use God often to justify things God likely ever did or commanded.... even in scripture.

[The Nehor]

Okay then, I think we're done here.  Apparently, "trusting the Spirit" is something that is innate to some, but to those who struggle to learn how, they're turned over to the devil.  Lovely.

Actually it is a choice, not some innate attribute. And yes, those who reject the Spirit are in the power of the devil. This is not some secret doctrine. It is all over the scriptures.

[Kenngo1969]

Oh my...you are focusing on something completely out of the discussion at hand (hence, my glib comment).

My mistake ... I didn't think my reading comprehension was all that bad, but ... Oh, well!  (Are you available to tutor me?  I could obviously use your help!  )

Edited April 4, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[The Nehor]

The fact that you are very self assured of your own testimony but doubt the testimony of others such as ISIS participants should give you pause. Why is your self assurance any more correct and accurate than the one they have that you most assuredly dismiss.

 

The answer is clear.  Such methods are unreliable.

Nazi scientists did terrible experiments under the aegis of scientific development. Therefore science is unreliable and we should ignore them all.

This is a false equivalency. I am not going to pretend that my supernal experiences with the divine are equivalent to a bunch of nuts masquerading political goals behind religion being brainwashed into killing themselves.

[Teancum]

Without polygamy, there is no house of Israel. 

 

 

Uhhhh why?  And so what?

[Kenngo1969]

1:  If you believe the flood is a historical event and 3 Nephi's account of mass destruction well ok.  Your God is a mass murderer I guess. ...

 

 

By that logic, why does God allow anyone to die?  Rule #1: Life, as we understand it, isn't fair.  Rule #2: When it comes to considering anything we think shouldn't happen (or shouldn't happen the way it does), refer to Rule #1.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[Teancum]

I have no problem with LDS folks who distain polygamy and would respectfully refuse to practice it if asked/commanded. I do have a problem with folks who seek to superimpose their bias/deeply held views and feeling about the practice upon literally BILLIONS of families throughout time by declaring plural marriages to not be eternal or ordained of God. Isn't it interesting that the most vocal supporters of marriage equality in mormondom tend to be the most vocal opponents of plural marriage. The way people compartmentalize their beliefs never ceases to amaze

 

 

I have no problem with Polygamy culturally though I think we have moved past it.  I do have a problem insisting God commanded it anciently. He did not. I do have a problem with religions teaching that the leader is given so special pass to take extra woman as wives, the leader using his power and position to persuade women to enter into such a relationship that would go against their beliefs,, ethics and social norms, etc.

 

I have a problem also with the fact that LDS Believers have to die on this hill of battle to preserve their testimony when they would never ever accept the way LDS polygamy was rolled out by anyone else.... no not ever.  

[Teancum]

Then, if you truly believe they were prophets, he should have issued a correction before it went too far.

 

Well he seems to have blew it on the priesthood ban as well.

[ttribe]

My mistake ... I didn't think my reading comprehension was all that bad, but ... Oh, well!  (Are you available to tutor me?  I could obviously use your help!  )

 

I'm not sure why you are resorting to snark, but let me clarify my statement (since I've accidently touched some nerve) - The fact that many good people are the product of polygamous relationships in the early days of the Church is not, IMO, prima facia evidence of the truthfulness of the doctrine having come from God.  To wit, Solomon was the biological product of David's relationship with Bathsheba, which we KNOW was not approved by God.  Yet, the lineage of the Savior comes through him.

Edited April 4, 2015 by ttribe

[The Nehor]

1:  If you believe the flood is a historical event and 3 Nephi's account of mass destruction well ok.  Your God is a mass murderer I guess.

 

2:  I have not idea how you can even think item 2 is a checkmate unless you are just having fun.

 

3:  People use God often to justify things God likely ever did or commanded.... even in scripture.

1. God allows all to die. Death is not so horrible. That he accelerates some people to death while letting others live longer is his prerogative. We are under a command not to kill unless specifically directed to. Everyone is going to die. We treat it as a grand tragedy. I am not sure why.

2: I am always trying to have fun.

3: But I am not trying to justify any murder. I am only justifying the possibility that one day I may be asked to do something that to others may seem horrible. I hope not and doubt it will happen. I would be wary of those earnestly desiring exceptions to the commandments. If Abraham had hated Isaac I would not believe the command to sacrifice Was of God. In the same way if Nephi lusted to kill Laban I would not trust his command to kill Laban came from God. An ISIS warrior who hates his enemies is to be equally distrusted.

[Mystery Meat]

Okay then, I think we're done here.  Apparently, "trusting the Spirit" is something that is innate to some, but to those who struggle to learn how, they're turned over to the devil.  Lovely.

 

It is innate to none. That is the point I have been trying to make. It is something that has taken me 30 years to even begin to feel some comfort with.

 

I stand by my comment about the devil. I know that up until about a month ago, and despite my best efforts, I was persuaded by just about any "doctrine" that sounded good, and was therefore in the hands of the devil. If a person is not relying on the Spirit, they must be looking to non-divine sources and, must, therefore, have entrusted their persuit of truth to the devil.

[Teancum]

That's when you compare to scriptural precedent, prophetic teaching, established protocols for revelation, and common sense.

You might also seek for a second witness as God has promised.

 

 

What about Islam?  They have a scriptural tradition yours does not include.   What a dilemma.

[Teancum]

Great question with a simple answer:

 

One (at least) of them is wrong.

 

 

Or both.....

[Mystery Meat]

The fact that you are very self assured of your own testimony but doubt the testimony of others such as ISIS participants should give you pause. Why is your self assurance any more correct and accurate than the one they have that you most assuredly dismiss.

 

The answer is clear.  Such methods are unreliable.

 

No they are no unreliable. He trusts his answers because they are his. 

 

If they are unreliable to you then that is something for you to resolve. But just as you are not responsible for my spiritual impressions, I am not responsible for your or lack thereof.

[Teancum]

By that logic, why does God allow anyone to die?  Rule #1: Life, as we understand it, isn't fair.  Rule #2: When it comes to considering anything we think shouldn't happen (or shouldn't happen the way it does), refer to Rule #1.

 

 

Allowing someone to die as a result or being mortal is quite a bit different then God instigating the events that kills thousands and millions.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Teancum

[Teancum]

No they are no unreliable. He trusts his answers because they are his. 

 

If they are unreliable to you then that is something for you to resolve. But just as you are not responsible for my spiritual impressions, I am not responsible for your or lack thereof.

 

 

You have yet to deal with the fact the those who hold to their personal religious experience as a guide to truth are often arriving at opposite conclusions.  Your testimony conflicts with that of a member of ISIS, an EV Christian or a devote Catholic?  Who is right?  You cannot all by correct.

[Mystery Meat]

You have yet to deal with the fact the those who hold to their personal religious experience as a guide to truth are often arriving at opposite conclusions.  Your testimony conflicts with that of a member of ISIS, an EV Christian or a devote Catholic?  Who is right?  You cannot all by correct.

 

I have dealt with it. I can't speak for other people. I can only bear testimony of my own experiences. Just because others have come to different conclusions does not mean I am bound to believe their testimonies. You clearly do not believe mine. That is your right. I can't spend too much time worrying about everyone else's testimony. I have my own to maintain. But I know my experiences and I know they are real and divine.

 

The problem I have with the heresy you are trying to teach is that it is intended to destroy confidence in the Holy Spirit. It is a false and insidious teaching. I would warn everyone I know to reject it and pity you for having let your heart and mind be corrupted by it. There is no attaining the truth without the holy influence of the Spirit. Reject his ability to teach and you or anyone else will never find pure truth.

[Teancum]

I have dealt with it. I can't speak for other people. I can only bear testimony of my own experiences. Just because others have come to different conclusions does not mean I am bound to believe their testimonies. You clearly do not believe mine. That is your right. I can't spend too much time worrying about everyone else's testimony. I have my own to maintain. But I know my experiences and I know they are real and divine.

 

The problem I have with the heresy you are trying to teach is that it is intended to destroy confidence in the Holy Spirit. It is a false and insidious teaching. I would warn everyone I know to reject it and pity you for having let your heart and mind be corrupted by it. There is no attaining the truth without the holy influence of the Spirit. Reject his ability to teach and you or anyone else will never find pure truth.

 

 

1:  The only way you have dealt with it is at you believe your witness is superior to others.  There is no other conclusion.  I am not asking you to believe their testimony. I am asking you to think about why yours is superior to theirs in your view.

 

2:  If it helps you maintain your testimony to call me a heretic and accuse me of trying to destroy someone's confidence in the Holy Ghost more power to you.  Your comments really are an attack and only accomplished to give you the confirmation bias that you seem to need.  I wonder why you are on a discussion board though given this position. I am simply discussing and challenging the same paradigm I used to have. If people can show me it has substance and can be used to find the truth I am open.  A problem with this method is something I am asking about.... what do you do when two or three good honest people use this method and believe God or the spirit has told them truth but their truths conflict? Rather than answer that you seem more comfortable in attacking me for asking it and feign a false pity and a take a rather perilously pious stand.  So be it.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Teancum

[ttribe]

Rather than answer that you seem more comfortable in attacking me for asking it and feign a false pity and a take a rather perilously pious stand.  So be it.

 

This seems to be the same general approach applied to the author of the article who was the original focus of the thread, as well.

[Mystery Meat]

1:  The only way you have dealt with it is at you believe your witness is superior to others.  There is no other conclusion.  I am not asking you to believe their testimony. I am asking you to think about why yours is superior to theirs in your view.

 

2:  If it helps you maintain your testimony to call me a heretic and accuse me of trying to destroy someone's confidence in the Holy Ghost more power to you.  Your comments really are an attack and only accomplished to give you the confirmation bias that you seem to need.  I wonder why you are on a discussion board though given this position. I am simply discussing and challenging the same paradigm I used to have. If people can show me it has substance and can be used to find the truth I am open.  A problem with this method is something I am asking about.... what do you do when two or three good honest people use this method and believe God or the spirit has told them truth but their truths conflict? Rather than answer that you seem more comfortable in attacking me for asking it and feign a false pity and a take a rather perilously pious stand.  So be it.

 

You are advocating for a paradigm without the Spirit. That is an unacceptable paradigm to a disciple of Jesus Christ.

[Teancum]

You are advocating for a paradigm without the Spirit. That is an unacceptable paradigm to a disciple of Jesus Christ.

 

 

And you continue to avoid the basic questions I ask. If it is too hard for you to deal with just say so.

[The Nehor]

Allowing someone to die as a result or being mortal is quite a bit different then God instigating the events that kills thousands and millions.

 

Is it?

 

God created the world. He has the power to prevent those deaths. If I were trained in medicine and watched your child die after an accident rather then helping am I not in some sense complicit in their death. When my grandfather died, not young but also not old, I prayed for him to be spared. God could have healed him. There was enough faith to do so but he was not healed. Is that so different from God striking him down because it was time for him to go home?

 

I also do not get why quantity is such a big deal. When thousands die prematurely is that so much worse then one dying prematurely. We are talking about God to whom (we are told) all are important. If it is justified in one case why not many? I have to admit I often envy the dead. In many cases their struggles are behind them while I struggle on in a life filled with pain, loneliness, and dreariness. I don't know why I have lived as long as I have while others doing much more good (and much more evil) are taken. I do trust that God has His reasons.

[The Nehor]

You have yet to deal with the fact the those who hold to their personal religious experience as a guide to truth are often arriving at opposite conclusions.  Your testimony conflicts with that of a member of ISIS, an EV Christian or a devote Catholic?  Who is right?  You cannot all by correct.

 

The ones in true communion with God.

[ttribe]

The ones in true communion with God.

 

So says the ISIS fighter, and the Iranian Ayatollah (Shiite), and the Sunni Imam, and the Rabbi, and the Catholic Priest, and the Jehovah Witness, and the Protestant, etc.

 

This kind of glib answer is no help at all.

[Mystery Meat]

And you continue to avoid the basic questions I ask. If it is too hard for you to deal with just say so.

 

I have not avoided it. My spiritual experience are mine and therefore trump others especially if they conflict with mine. That is not out of a sense of superiority, but because I trust my experiences with the Spirit as I have seen their fruits in my life. I believe that those who claim testimonies of ISIS, Catholicism, etc. are wrong. Catholics can have testimonies have true principles contained within Catholicism (and there are many). You can be unsatisfied with that answer if you wish. But it is the answer the Spirit has whispered and more recently SHOUTED at me. 

 

For me, it took a long time for me to hear over the unnerving wailing of the devil.