Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said: Yeah, That part I get. Nothing like the smell of out-of-context quotation in the late afternoon.
JAHS Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said: I'm confident the Church will survive. I wonder if they will take out ads on the video? They did it with that musical. ;-) Edited April 29, 2016 by JAHS
Damien the Leper Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, bluebell said: True. The members are meant to cater to the wishes of God. The question then becomes, is it God's wish that the members sustain the leaders of the church by following them. It's a question every member must answer for themselves. Every person must decide for themself the nature and scope of their relationship with God and what God wants from them. The LDS church does not determine this nor does it have any bearing on one's eternal destination.
bluebell Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 1 minute ago, Valentinus said: Every person must decide for themself the nature and scope of their relationship with God and what God wants from them. The LDS church does not determine this nor does it have any bearing on one's eternal destination. If the LDS church is God's church and is His kingdom on the earth and wields His authority, then it serves a role in God's plan far and above what you believe its role to be. Because of that "if" we will have to agree to disagree on your statement of fact above. 3
Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, bsjkki said: My issue is more error and wrongdoing on the part of my Priesthood leaders is, actually, error and wrongdoing. Is that a spirit of faultfinding? To you maybe yes, but if you can never discuss things that go wrong, how are they ever fixed? As I said, I don't uphold anyone in wrongdoing, even priesthood leaders.
bluebell Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 7 minutes ago, JAHS said: I wonder if they will take out ads on the video? They did it with that musical. I don't think the church would try to capitalize on someone's pain, regardless of how misplaced they believed the anger to be.
Damien the Leper Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, bluebell said: If the LDS church is God's church and is His kingdom on the earth and wields His authority, then it serves a role in God's plan far and above what you believe its role to be. Because of that "if" we will have to agree to disagree on your statement of fact above. A person saying a church says God says so is hearsay and duly subject to scrutiny and criticism.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 11 minutes ago, ttribe said: On the other hand, being aggressively confrontational about someone's "wrong views" is almost a 100% effective way to ensure they will not be converted. I don't disagree with this in theory. I guess the devil is in the details -- what one regards as being "aggressively confrontational."
ttribe Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don't disagree with this in theory. I guess the devil is in the details -- what one regards as being "aggressively confrontational." So it would seem.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 11 minutes ago, JAHS said: I wonder if they will take out ads on the video? They did it with that musical. 3 minutes ago, bluebell said: I don't think the church would try to capitalize on someone's pain, regardless of how misplaced they believed the anger to be. The stark difference, of course, is that the musical was essentially silliness and spoofery. As opposed to earnest anger and bitterness.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, Valentinus said: A person saying a church says God says so is hearsay and duly subject to scrutiny and criticism. Hopefully such scrutiny will take the form of sincere prayer accompanied by faith and hope. That's what our missionaries teach.
Jeanne Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 32 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Treating people with real love and respect is consistent with the church's long held doctrines, values, teachings and beliefs, yet it isn't adhering to those values. The policy is antithetical to the values of the church. One day the church will recognize that and retract. In the mean time, many people are alienated and pushed away. The church may be fine with that but I don't believe God will be. Thank you for this,
JAHS Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 12 minutes ago, bluebell said: I don't think the church would try to capitalize on someone's pain, regardless of how misplaced they believed the anger to be. Sorry, that was supposed to be a joke.
Scott Lloyd Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 38 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Treating people with real love and respect is consistent with the church's long held doctrines, values, teachings and beliefs, yet it isn't adhering to those values. This is a false accusation. Quote The policy is antithetical to the values of the church. One day the church will recognize that and retract. In the mean time, many people are alienated and pushed away. The church may be fine with that but I don't believe God will be. I don't believe God is "fine" with calling evil good and good evil. One day, those who have done so will recognize this. 2
Popular Post JLHPROF Posted April 29, 2016 Popular Post Posted April 29, 2016 40 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Treating people with real love and respect is consistent with the church's long held doctrines, values, teachings and beliefs, yet it isn't adhering to those values. The policy is antithetical to the values of the church. One day the church will recognize that and retract. In the mean time, many people are alienated and pushed away. The church may be fine with that but I don't believe God will be. Love the sinner, don't tolerate the sin. Hasn't that always been the way. I for one don't believe the Church owes any member an apology for hurting them by not accepting their sin as ok. I would believe the Church would owe an apology for an attack not based on their doctrines and beliefs. The day the Church embraces sin to avoid alienating the sinner, the Church becomes worthless. 5
Mystery Meat Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 One thing has always been true: The wicked taketh the truth to be hard. 4
JLHPROF Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 3 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said: One thing has always been true: The wicked taketh the truth to be hard. They also flee where no man pursueth. 2
Damien the Leper Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Hopefully such scrutiny will take the form of sincere prayer accompanied by faith and hope. That's what our missionaries teach. Close examination of church history, both theological and social teaching, transparency, etc should sigh in.
Damien the Leper Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 13 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said: One thing has always been true: The wicked taketh the truth to be hard. Theologically, truth is relative. The only absolute truth about God is that He is love. What writers of scripture say about God and what He wants is their prerogative and not that of the body of believers.
bluebell Posted April 29, 2016 Posted April 29, 2016 48 minutes ago, Valentinus said: A person saying a church says God says so is hearsay and duly subject to scrutiny and criticism. All of our beliefs are subject to scrutiny and criticism.
Hamba Tuhan Posted April 30, 2016 Posted April 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: The immaturity is on the part of those who vainly believe the Church of Jesus Christ can be pressured to behave in a manner inconsistent with its long-held doctrines, values, teachings and beliefs. And who, it would appear from this thread, rely heavily on classic emotional blackmail for that pressure. 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted April 30, 2016 Posted April 30, 2016 Truly ugly art makes me sad on so many levels and for so many reasons. 1
Johnnie Cake Posted April 30, 2016 Author Posted April 30, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: The only evolution, if any, there has been is in Mr. Glenn's wishful thinking. Homosexual behavior has never been acceptable in the Church of Jesus Christ, and there has never been any indication or hint that it ever will be. Scott, can you share with us any quote from the New Testiment where Jesus denounced homosexual behavior? If you can't (and you can't) then it's fair to say that Jesus was silent on this subject Edited April 30, 2016 by Johnnie Cake 1
Lemuel Posted April 30, 2016 Posted April 30, 2016 9 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: Scott, can you share with us any quote from the New Testiment where Jesus denounced homosexual behavior? If you can't (and you can't) then it's fair to say that Jesus was silent on this subject But the Book of Mormon says... ...oh, never mind.
sunstoned Posted April 30, 2016 Posted April 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Being sustained in one's erroneous views or dispositions has never been a reasonable expectation from a conversation with one's priesthood leaders. If it were, they wouldn't be very good priesthood leaders.
Recommended Posts