Russell C McGregor Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Yeah. I meant that playfully, glad it was received that way. You have no problem at all with polygamy? Wow. You may be alone in that. No, he's not. He's probably joined by most people who have no problem at all with jealousy. Edited November 14, 2015 by Russell C McGregor
Russell C McGregor Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 What about the irony of rejecting the teachings of Jesus (according to scripture) over the words of a church leader, when the whole point was supposed to be following Jesus in the first place? Which teachings of Jesus are being rejected?
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I know lots of people with no sin. People who have been forgiven for their past sins because they have forsaken (turned away from/repented from) them. And if they ever do sin in the future they will most likely turn away from that sin (or those sins) too which will mean they will not have any sins then either.It's pretty easy to be without sin. Just repent when necessary and you won't have any sins either. "Why do you call Me good?" Jesus replied. "No one is good except God alone. Of course judging itself is sin, so as soon as these sinless people start to do that, they will once again be sinners Edited November 14, 2015 by Gray
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 That rep point was an error. Ridiculous. Look around you. Male and Female are kind of a big deal. Adam and Eve- the fall, redemption- no reproduction before the fall- gender in the pre-existence? Ancillary? It is the one doctrine that defines Mormonism from all other "Christians". This is how to propagandize and minimize central conflicts Sexual reproduction is the nuts and bolts of biology. Cats reproduce too. So what?
filovirus Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) "Why do you call Me good?" Jesus replied. "No one is good except God alone. Of course judging itself is sin, so as soon as these sinless people start to do that, they will once again be sinnersGod's goodness makes up for our lack of goodness. It's called "justification", and we are justified when we covenant with him. In essence, we are made good through/together with Christ (atonement). Edited November 14, 2015 by filovirus
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 So you don't like the cleansing of the temple part, or the "go and sin no more" part? You just like the gentle reassuring, it doesn't matter what you do, love is all you need part? The "if it feels good do it" part? I prefer the teachings that bear good fruit. Go and burn down a currency exchange store, see what fruit that bears in your life. Then compare what happens in your life when you attempt to accept the "other" without judgement. See what bears the best fruit. The gospel should ultimately be practical and subject to testing and revision. That way it's a living, evolving thing, not a dead laundry list of rules.
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 And in JST Matthew 7 he said: 1 Now these are the words which Jesus taught his disciples that they should say unto the people.2 Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged: but judge righteous judgment. And yet, in the Book of Mormon: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 You seem to be trying to hold the LDS community to an understanding of Jesus' teachings (by ignoring some of them) that the church doesn't support. The church has always functioned on the concept of judging righteously. Should I instead ingore Jesus' teachings that plainly say do not judge?
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I'm sorry but i'm not sure what you are trying to say here. Wouldn't it be just as correct for someone who disagrees with you to say that some people want to ignore the bad fruit and call the tree good anyway? Or am i completely confused on your point? I don't see the use in these abstract 'unsupported by anything but personal opinion' concepts as evidence that a certain point of view is correct. It just turns into dueling 'i'm more in tune with the Spirit than you are' posts (where everyone ends up looking like an idiot). Sorry, I thought I was being clear. Gay marriage bears good fruit in people's lives - the same kind of good fruit in "traditional" marriage. And yet we're supposed to observe the good fruit in these gay families' lives and say the tree is rotten? Edited November 14, 2015 by Gray
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 In my understanding, the beam can't just be 'sin' because then what Jesus said is contradictory to His other teachings. He would basically be saying 'you can never help someone overcome their sins because you are always sinful.' That doesn't make sense though because He sends people to call others to repentance all the time. When you read the verse in context it seems clear that this is a teaching on not being a hypocrite. The 'don't try to make someone feel bad for sleeping in on sunday and missing church when you are having an affair' kind of thing. Spiritually get yourself right before you try to spiritually help others. Oh, there are plenty of things that are attributed to Jesus that contradict each other. We must do as Mary and "choose the better part"
JLHPROF Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 And yet, in the Book of Mormon: Verily, verily, I say unto you, Judge not, that ye be not judged. So Christ isn't allowed to have qualifiers in some discourses unless he includes them every time he spoke?Good to know. 1
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 No, he's not. He's probably joined by most people who have no problem at all with jealousy.Put me on the list of people with no problem with it and add my wife. 1
bluebell Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Sorry, I thought I was being clear. Gay marriage bears good fruit in people's lives - the same kind of good fruit in "traditional" marriage. And yet we're supposed to observe the good fruit in these gay families' lives and say the tree is rotten? I've seen people who say that swinging bears good fruit in people's lives. I've seen people strenuously argue that abortion brings good fruit. That living together without being married brings good fruit. I don't believe them. I don't think it's possible to bear good fruit while breaking the commandments of God, regardless of how happy someone is or how wonderful they feel about their choice. 1
filovirus Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Sorry, I thought I was being clear. Gay marriage bears good fruit in people's lives - the same kind of good fruit in "traditional" marriage. And yet we're supposed to observe the good fruit in these gay families' lives and say the tree is rotten?We are talking spiritual fruit right? How can it create good fruit spiritually when it is counter to the word of God? 1
bluebell Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Oh, there are plenty of things that are attributed to Jesus that contradict each other. We must do as Mary and "choose the better part" Not in my opinion.
bluebell Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Should I instead ingore Jesus' teachings that plainly say do not judge? No. You should figure out what he actually meant by that one statement by reading everything he has ever said about judging and calling people to repentance.
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 I see where stemelbow is coming from. As we know, Joseph's earliest polygamous relationships were a secret from Emma. He said he had his reasons. You said you wouldn't believe someone who said, after the fact, that they had their reasons. Joseph Smith's situation seems to fit right into what you said. ETA: I don't mean to make this a tangent about Joseph Smith and polygamy -- such conversations actually don't interest me all that much. I'm just supporting stemelbow's claim.My wife's grandmother was born into "legal" LDS polygamy back in "the day" and told stories about how her mother enjoyed cooking and raising kids with the "sister wives". Each family was a community of co-operation. Of course that was not all families I am sure- but there are still many in the church today who have stories of ancestors who enjoyed the lifestyle considerably
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) If you can demonstrate objectively that something hurtful is doing more good than harm, then fine.Oh my gosh. Please provide objective means for measuring "hurtful" "more good", "harm" and for that matter "demonstrate objectively" itself. And don't forget a matrix which measures "hurtful" points equally with "good" points so they balance accurately. Should good points be in larger gradients than bad points, or vice versa? How would know how "big" to make a "point"? How can one who understand situational morality make such a statement? You decry literalism and absolutism and then say that? No good points for you! Edited November 14, 2015 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 Saving them from hypothetical harm while subjecting them to actual and demonstrable harm isn't loveSo you snatch them off a railroad track, breaking their arm thereby subjecting them to "demonstrable harm" when the train might derail first not killing them, and because you broke their arm, you have not manifested love? I have to leave this. My toes are curling backwards. It's like fingernails on a blackboard times 100 just listening to this "logic". I know. I will make sure the door doesn't.... never mind. You say the "core doctrine" is subjective for each person and then you argue it for x pages. Good idea.
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 I prefer the teachings that bear good fruit. Go and burn down a currency exchange store, see what fruit that bears in your life. Then compare what happens in your life when you attempt to accept the "other" without judgement. See what bears the best fruit. The gospel should ultimately be practical and subject to testing and revision. That way it's a living, evolving thing, not a dead laundry list of rules.What does that have to do with the question? Toodles! The smoke is too thick for me- and then those dang mirrors....
mfbukowski Posted November 14, 2015 Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Sexual reproduction is the nuts and bolts of biology. Cats reproduce too. So what?Oh yes I guess you are right. Dang. I thought sexual mores had something to do with all religions. My bad. And clearly sexual mores are irrelevant to Mormonism- no Mormons are concerned with them or anything. I forgot that part. And clearly this thread has nothing to do with sexual mores. Can't figure out for the life of me why I even brought it up. OOPS here comes that door.... ! Got me! Edited November 14, 2015 by mfbukowski
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 So Christ isn't allowed to have qualifiers in some discourses unless he includes them every time he spoke?Good to know. Why choose one version over the other?
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I've seen people who say that swinging bears good fruit in people's lives. I've seen people strenuously argue that abortion brings good fruit. That living together without being married brings good fruit. I've never heard anyone make those kinds of arguments for either of those things. But I've personally witnessed the good fruit of committed gay relationships. I don't believe them. I don't think it's possible to bear good fruit while breaking the commandments of God, regardless of how happy someone is or how wonderful they feel about their choice. How do we know if something is good or bad to begin with? Examine the fruit. It's clear to me that gay marriage is not against the commandments. It's not a sin. Jesus said to live his teachings and you'll find out that way if they are true or not. Experience counts in determining right from wrong. Oh, and wickedness never was happiness. But I've personally observed that the church's path for gay people often leads to misery, while gay marriage leads to real happiness. That's why I've come to the conclusions I have come to. The gospel isn't just about a laundry list of thou shalt nots. It's also about taking broadly applicable principles and using them to develop good moral reasoning. Edited November 14, 2015 by Gray
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 We are talking spiritual fruit right? How can it create good fruit spiritually when it is counter to the word of God? All things are spiritual, right? No division between the spiritual and the temporal. Or at least Joseph Smith thought so.
Gray Posted November 14, 2015 Author Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Not in my opinion. Jesus is quoted as saying to do good works in secret so you can be rewarded by God, and to do your good works openly to let your light shine for others. All scripture is self contradictory. It's unavoidable, as scripture is a human product Edited November 14, 2015 by Gray
Recommended Posts