SeekingUnderstanding Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 17 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Are you abandoning your smug assertion that the Church of Jesus Christ does not "recirculate" the three publications above after I proved you wrong? If you're not going to stand by an assertion, you had best retract it to keep the discussion honest. As for your latest post here, you are making brash accusations and assuming they are a given, but you are not forthcoming with substantiation or documentation. Your own rejection doesn't automatically make a thing false. Just for the record, when most people mention Gospel Doctrine, they are referring to the one by Bruce R. McConkie. Good catch on the other two though. Edit - As Scott points out below, I was thinking of Mormon Doctrine and not Gospel Doctrine. Edited June 8, 2016 by SeekingUnderstanding 1
HappyJackWagon Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 14 hours ago, The Nehor said: Criminal huh? What do you think the sentencing guidelines should be for this crime? The same judgment from God as any other sin...and of course other people are under no obligation to follow or obey the individuals making the false claims. So maybe the sentence is irrelevance. I also think that anyone who claims to be speaking for God, who is not, should apologize and admit their error to everyone who may have believed them. Sounds fair to me. 1
consiglieri Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 12 hours ago, rodheadlee said: You're joking, right? That webpage reads like a tabloid. Evidence strongly points to....JFS may have... You must have overlooked the fact the webpage was based on a 2014 Dialogue article by Stan Larson. There is even a link provided. I know you are afraid to find out the truth about this, but I encourage you to give it a try, just the same.
rodheadlee Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 1 hour ago, consiglieri said: You must have overlooked the fact the webpage was based on a 2014 Dialogue article by Stan Larson. There is even a link provided. I know you are afraid to find out the truth about this, but I encourage you to give it a try, just the same. Yeah, I'm skeered. Evidence stronlgy points to panspermia and aliens may have landed on the darkside of the moon. And what does Stan Larson think of the webpage?
Scott Lloyd Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said: Just for the record, when most people mention Gospel Doctrine, they are referring to the one by Bruce R. McConkie. Good catch on the other two though. The book by Bruce R. McConkie is titled Mormon Doctrine, not Gospel Doctrine, which is a book by Joseph F. Smith. If that's not what theplains meant, let him correct himself. But even if he meant Mormon Doctrine, he would be hard-pressed to prove his insinuation that the Church is quietly disavowing that book. Books go out of print all the time, generally because their popularity wanes in the marketplace. Edited to add: I don't concede that "most people" say "Gospel Doctrine" when they mean "Mormon Doctrine." Each, in its own right, is a classic in Mormon literature. Edited June 8, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
SeekingUnderstanding Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: The book by Bruce R. McConkie is titled Mormon Doctrine, not Gospel Doctrine, which is a book by Joseph F. Smith. If that's not what theplains meant, let him correct himself. But even if he meant Mormon Doctrine, he would be hard-pressed to prove his insinuation that the Church is quietly disavowing that book. Books go out of print all the time, generally because their popularity wanes in the marketplace. Haha. Guess the jokes on me. Thanks for the correction.
consiglieri Posted June 8, 2016 Posted June 8, 2016 2 hours ago, rodheadlee said: Yeah, I'm skeered. Evidence stronlgy points to panspermia and aliens may have landed on the darkside of the moon. And what does Stan Larson think of the webpage? It is obvious you are not interested in examining evidence that contradicts your religious views. You could prove me wrong by actually reading Stan Larson's article in the 2014 Dialogue journal and then making some intelligent comments. I won't hold my breath, though.
rodheadlee Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 19 hours ago, consiglieri said: It is obvious you are not interested in examining evidence that contradicts your religious views. You could prove me wrong by actually reading Stan Larson's article in the 2014 Dialogue journal and then making some intelligent comments. I won't hold my breath, though. I read it right up to the part that says we can speculate. I'm going to speculate that JS cut the pages out and started over becuase he didn't like the way it came out. Then someone dug them out ofr the trash and off we go. But I won't deny that the victors write the History, it's true for all civilizations and organizations. This brings us back to the Holy Ghost and needing a witness to confirm or deny the truth of the LDS Church and JS's vision. If you don't have a witness you probably shouldn't get baptized. 1
Tacenda Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 57 minutes ago, rodheadlee said: I read it right up to the part that says we can speculate. I'm going to speculate that JS cut the pages out and started over becuase he didn't like the way it came out. Then someone dug them out ofr the trash and off we go. But I won't deny that the victors write the History, it's true for all civilizations and organizations. This brings us back to the Holy Ghost and needing a witness to confirm or deny the truth of the LDS Church and JS's vision. If you don't have a witness you probably shouldn't get baptized. How many children at 8 years old get a witness? I know I didn't. I was basically herded with the rest of the children my age into the room with a font. Didn't feel any different after, didn't know much about the promises I was making, granted I wasn't the smartest cookie in the jar. All my life I went along, never having to get my own testimony until now. And I'm a little old for that, but glad for the opportunity to figure it out myself. My faith crisis did that for me, my doubts did that.
JLHPROF Posted June 9, 2016 Posted June 9, 2016 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: How many children at 8 years old get a witness? I know I didn't. I was basically herded with the rest of the children my age into the room with a font. Didn't feel any different after, didn't know much about the promises I was making, granted I wasn't the smartest cookie in the jar. All my life I went along, never having to get my own testimony until now. And I'm a little old for that, but glad for the opportunity to figure it out myself. My faith crisis did that for me, my doubts did that. Well then perhaps the problem isn't baptizing children at 8, but the insufficient job we are doing to prepare them for it. I don't hold to the idea that children cannot be sufficiently prepared for Baptism at 8. I do hold to the notion that it rarely happens. Mary was raised in the temple until she was around 12 and gave birth to the son of God around 14. Christ was teaching the rabbis in the temple at age 12 and astounding them with his knowledge (and no, that wasn't because he had superpowers). Joseph Smith had the faith to get on his knees and ask God for an answer at 14 (regardless of whether someone believes his answer was real). Samuel heard the voice of the Lord and was called to be a prophet at 12. If we aren't teaching our children to prepare them for baptism that falls on our head. Personally I see no issue holding off baptizing a child until they are prepared. All that is required to be baptized is to recognize Christ as their Savior and the need for repentance. 1
theplains Posted June 14, 2016 Posted June 14, 2016 On 09/06/2016 at 0:24 PM, JLHPROF said: Mary was raised in the temple until she was around 12 ... Where do you find that? Jim
JLHPROF Posted June 15, 2016 Posted June 15, 2016 3 hours ago, theplains said: Where do you find that? Jim Multiple apocryphal texts and Jewish tradition.
Recommended Posts