jwhitlock Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Yes, because everyone knows that burning someone to death for their religious beliefs is exactly the same thing as not issuing marriage licenses to those who are legally qualified to obtain them. I'm glad that Elder Oaks agrees with me. Dang it, I have to agree with you. It's a major faux pas to compare vastly dissimilar situations and claim they're the same.
Zakuska Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Nope. Alma wasn't ordered to execute Abinadi. Alma didn't refuse; it didn't get to that point. Alma pleaded - which was his right - for Abinadi and was threatened and chased out for doing so. Ummmm.... yes he was. You'd better read the story again. Abinadi comes in and bears testimony of Christ before King Noah and his Priestly court who had all sworn an oath of alegience to their king. Abinadi pleads with the king and his court to repent. The king gets infuriated and orders Abinadis execution. At that moment Alma makes a choice and takes Abinadis side of the argument over the king. Because Alma chose a side that wasn't the kings is the reason he got chased out. Edited October 21, 2015 by Zakuska
jwhitlock Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Ummmm.... yes he was. You'd better read the story again.Abinadi comes in and bears testimony of Christ before King Noah and his Priestly court who had all sworn an oath of alegience to their king. Abinadi pleads with the king and his court to repent.Alma listens to Abinadi and takes his side of the argument over the king. Because Alma chose a side that wasn't the kings is the reason he got chased out. Point out where Alma was ordered execute Abinadi.
KevinG Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 I'm glad that Elder Oaks agrees with me. Perhaps you are only a slightly dirty critic rather than a filthy apostate? 1
jkwilliams Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Perhaps you are only a slightly dirty critic rather than a filthy apostate? I decided a long time ago to embrace the term apostate, as it seems so wonderfully over the top. 1
KevinG Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 I decided a long time ago to embrace the term apostate, as it seems so wonderfully over the top. True. True. That's similar to why I picked the title "Outspoken Zealot of Moderation".
ksfisher Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 What did Alma do though?Pleaded Abinadi's case to the king and did everything he could to prevent it. Voiced his objections openly. Tried to change the law... do what ever he could before he had to flee because the King wanted to unjustly persecute him too.He didn't leave by choice or simply.... resigning.Nor did he simply do his duty and join in the BBQ and festivities.He was removed by force and unjust laws.That's exactly what Kim Davis did. Even going to Jail for it. Being fired for cause had a lot more consequeses in those days.
jkwilliams Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 True. True. That's similar to why I picked the title "Outspoken Zealot of Moderation". I knew I liked you. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted October 21, 2015 Author Posted October 21, 2015 I decided a long time ago to embrace the term apostate, as it seems so wonderfully over the top. True. True. That's similar to why I picked the title "Outspoken Zealot of Moderation". "Internet tyrant" is over-the-top as well. But I didn't pick it so much as had it thrust upon me. Though I did embrace it -- with the modifier benevolent.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 21, 2015 Author Posted October 21, 2015 Yes, because everyone knows that burning someone to death for their religious beliefs is exactly the same thing as not issuing marriage licenses to those who are legally qualified to obtain them. I'm glad that Elder Oaks agrees with me. Dang it, I have to agree with you. It's a major faux pas to compare vastly dissimilar situations and claim they're the same.I'm going to have to shut my eyes and hold my nose and do so as well. (Just kidding, JK. You're all right!) 2
Zakuska Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) Point out where Alma was ordered execute Abinadi. Sure thing... Mosiah 13:1 And now when the king had heard these words, he said unto his priestS: Away with this fellow, and slay him;, for he is mad. It isn't until after this order that Alma begins pleading for Abinadi's life. Edited October 21, 2015 by Zakuska
jkwilliams Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Sure thing...Mosiah 13:1And now when the king had heard these words, he said unto his priestS: Away with this fellow, and slay him;, for he is mad.It isn't until after this order that Alma begins pleading for Abinadi's life. But these were religious leaders (i.e., priests), so not analogous to Ms. Davis. 1
thesometimesaint Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) We're definitely headed for the latter. We're out of balance. I don't see much evidence for that. About 90% of Americans are religious/spiritual. Atheism has never been a big factor in American demographics. I want a secular government. One that neither promotes religion nor discriminates against religion. I want the right to believe anything I want as long as my exercise of that right doesn't interfer with your right to believe anything you want. I truly believe our Article of Faith #11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. Edited October 21, 2015 by thesometimesaint
Zakuska Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 (edited) But these were "religious leaders" (i.e., priests), so not analogous to Ms. Davis. They were more than "religious leaders" they were officers of the law because Noah had replaced all the godly priests of his father Zeniff's court with lazy scheels of his own who were taxing the people to death. (see Mosiah 11:5-6) "Religious leaders" don't usually subsist off taxes of the people now do they? Ms. Davis was an officer of the court and so was Alma. Edited October 21, 2015 by Zakuska
jkwilliams Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 They were more than religious leaders they where the law because Noah had replaced all the godly priests of his father with lazy sheels of his own. So, a priest/toadie appointed by a wicked king is analogous to an elected official in a secular government. Got it. 1
jwhitlock Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Sure thing...Mosiah 13:1And now when the king had heard these words, he said unto his priestS: Away with this fellow, and slay him;, for he is mad.It isn't until after this order that Alma begins pleading for Abinadi's life. So, the priests - and not the guards of the king - were going to do the actual slaying, correct? And since the arbitrary word of the king was absolute law that people were forced to obey or be put to death, that's the same situation as that the clerk was placed, in correct?
jwhitlock Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 So, a priest/toadie appointed by a wicked king is analogous to an elected official in a secular government. Got it. Actually, I know of a number of elected officials where this difference would be negligible...
jwhitlock Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 I don't see much evidence for that. About 90% of Americans are religious/spiritual. Atheism has never been a big factor in American demographics. I want a secular government. One that neither promotes religion nor discriminates against religion. I want the right to believe anything I want as long as my exercise of that right doesn't interfer with your right to believe anything you want. I truly believe our Article of Faith #11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. So we can all agree on objective definitions for what constitutes the promotion of religion?
Kenngo1969 Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 ... Kim Davis did exatly what Martin Luther King Jr. did.No, actually, she didn't do "exatly" what Dr. King did. Dr. King advocated civil disobedience, which involves breaking a law one sees as unjust while also accepting the consequences of that choice. Kim Davis wants to have her cake and eat it, too, by breaking the law and not being subject to any of the consequences of that choice. https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2015/09/24/kim-davis-is-wrong/ 2
ksfisher Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Sure thing...Mosiah 13:1And now when the king had heard these words, he said unto his priestS: Away with this fellow, and slay him;, for he is mad.It isn't until after this order that Alma begins pleading for Abinadi's life. It's actually not until the kings second order in 17:1 that Alma pleads for Abinidi's life. And as Alma is an advisor to the king this seems to be well within his job description. Verse 3 would seem to be the place where Alma leaves King Noah's empoyment and is then free to preach and teach whatever he wants. Alma and the Kentucky clerk situation don't seem to be comperable. 3
ksfisher Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 But these were religious leaders (i.e., priests), so not analogous to Ms. Davis. I think it could be argued that at the time politics and religion were so intertwined at to be indishtingishable. The king was the communities religious leader.
jkwilliams Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 I think it could be argued that at the time politics and religion were so intertwined at to be indishtingishable. The king was the communities religious leader. Sure, but we have a secular, nonreligious democratic republic, not a religious monarchy.
ksfisher Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 "Religious leaders" don't usually subsist off taxes of the people now do they? Ever read any European history?
ksfisher Posted October 21, 2015 Posted October 21, 2015 Sure, but we have a secular, nonreligious democratic republic, not a religious monarchy. Right. The two situations are in no ways comperable. But to say that King Noah's priests were only religious leaders is probably not correct. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted October 21, 2015 Author Posted October 21, 2015 Ever read any European history?To this day, they still have state-supported churches in Europe. 1
Recommended Posts