Jump to content

Do The Essays Confirm "anti-Mormon Lies"?


Do the Essays Confirm "Anti-Mormon" Statements?  

62 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you recognize any information in the new Gospel Topic Essays as what members had previously told you were only "anti-Mormon lies"?

    • Yes
      41
    • No
      21
  2. 2. If "yes", then approximately how many of these previously "anti-Mormon lies" did you find confirmed in the Gospel Topic Essays?

    • N/A (Chose "No" to Question 1)
      22
    • Only 1
      1
    • A Few
      9
    • Several
      12
    • Many
      22


Recommended Posts

I don't know what he meant by "gate will be closed forever against you" but she did refuse, and Joseph told her 

 

"He walked across the room, returned, and stood before me. With the most beautiful expression of countenance, he said, "God almighty bless you. You shall have a manifestation of the will of God concerning you; a testimony that you can never deny. I will tell you what it shall be. It shall be that peace and joy that you never knew"  

 

I don't think the sounds like a threat of damnation. 

 

If you give me clear evidence of threats, I will leave the church. How about that?   

I don't want you to leave the church so I wouldn't share it even if I could think of one off hand.

 

But you might want to be careful about making such proclamations. Church history is full of surprises and I wouldn't want to make any promises based on what I may or may not find.

Link to comment

. But yes, I think he did wrong, and I've said so. I don't think I've said anything disrespectful or out of turn.

You claimed you were accused of condemning Joseph because you said he did wrong. I was pointing out that it was not for just saying that because if so I would have been condemned as well since I've said multiple times on this board I thought Joseph was wrong in some of the things he did.

"With respect, cal, you are treated very different by the average defender on this board than John can expect to be treated. You and he could post the exact same words in a thread and he will be treated very differently than you. I'd be careful not to place all the blame on the messenger."

I have no doubt his words are treated differently when he says something simple like "Joseph did wrong". That is my point. He is just not being condemned, etc because he said Joseph was wrong. He has said a lot of things over the years and approved of others' words that have led people to believing that is what he means.

This is what he said and he didn't put any conditions attached to it. "Neither do I. But the second I say I think he was wrong in this case, I'm told I'm condemning, I'm not considering context, I'm finding fault. No, I'm just looking at a situation and following my conscience."

Edited by calmoriah
Link to comment

I would think the gate is the gate to the celestial kingdom.

 

I don't know what that means, and I don't think she quoted the exact words, nobody quotes the exact words, History is not always reliable. History does not deal with certainties. 

 

But you might want to be careful about making such proclamations. Church history is full of surprises and I wouldn't want to make any promises based on what I may or may not find.

 

I agree History is full of surprises, but if there is strong evidence for that, it is something that I will not deny, we must follow the evidence. 

Edited by TheSkepticChristian
Link to comment

You claimed you were accused of condemning Joseph because you said he did wrong. I was pointing out that it was not for just saying that because if so I would have been condemned as well since I've said multiple times on this board I thought Joseph was wrong in some of the things he did.

"With respect, cal, you are treated very different by the average defender on this board than John can expect to be treated. You and he could post the exact same words in a thread and he will be treated very differently than you. I'd be careful not to place all the blame on the messenger."

I have no doubt his words are treated differently when he says something simple like "Joseph did wrong". That is my point. He is just not being condemned, etc because he said Joseph was wrong. He has said a lot of things over the years and approved of others' words that have led people to believing that is what he means.

This is what he said and he didn't put any conditions attached to it. "Neither do I. But the second I say I think he was wrong in this case, I'm told I'm condemning, I'm not considering context, I'm finding fault. No, I'm just looking at a situation and following my conscience."

 

I'll just say that I believe he could copy a criticism written by you, word for word, and he would be attacked far more forcefully than you would.  I'll leave it at that.

Link to comment

I'll just say that I believe he could copy a criticism written by you, word for word, and he would be attacked far more forcefully than you would.  I'll leave it at that.

 

I think that's probably right, but cal is right that I have a history, so whatever I say carries a lot of baggage with it, no matter how politely I say it.

Link to comment

I think that's probably right, but cal is right that I have a history, so whatever I say carries a lot of baggage with it, no matter how politely I say it.

 

Understood.

 

BTW, I understand bags fly free on Southwest.

Edited by ttribe
Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...