Duncan Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 31 minutes ago, strappinglad said: I probably have a different understanding of what " delivered unto the buffetings of Satan " means. I've been wrong before. 26 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the aHoly Spirit of promise, according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies, and if they commit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation; but they shall be destroyed in the flesh, and shall be delivered unto the buffetings of Satan unto the day of redemption, saith the Lord God. I though the buffetings of Satan was moving to Calgary, hmm! 1
Storm Rider Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, SouthernMo said: That’s fine. I take issue with the idea that being right with the LDS church and God are synonymous. I guess that is like a Catholic having the same opinion. It is a little bit of a Duh moment. Whatever floats your boat; just don't ask everyone else to go along. To be right with God begins and ends with obedience. It does not and has never meant you get to do and believe whatever you want and it is okay. That has never been an apt description of the Christian God. 1
Jeanne Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 1 hour ago, rockpond said: There isn’t much that makes sense about the second anointing. And the secrecy surrounding its existence is troubling to me. I agree. When I first heard about 2A's..I thought this takes away true justice and the very idea of real repentance. It is a get out of jail free card.
SouthernMo Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 9 hours ago, Avatar4321 said: I understand the perspective. I simply have to conclude its wrong. Moroni has given us the principles to judge between good and evil. If you right with God, you would not have issues with apostasy. You would not resist the urging of the Spirit to be humble and submissive. You would be bringing people to Christ and not taking them away. Look at King Benjamin’s sermon on putting off the natural man, if you are following his admonition you would be right with God. Otherwise you are in the natural man state and an enemy to God. another good reference is the attributes that being priesthood power in 121. can you be humble, Meek, submissive, gentle, kind etc and fight against the authority God has established over you? I picture Samuel standing on a wall preaching to the Nephites. I picture Abinadi standing before the priests of Noah. I picture Christ condemning the practices of the Sadducees and Pharasees. I picture Moroni calling to Pahoran for more suppprt. I picture Nephi calling for his brothers to support him. I picture Paul standing in Rome. I could go on and on. These are not examples of meekness and submissiveness, yet we revere all of these men and their actions I illustrate. Bill Reel does not accept the authority of the LDS church. Why would I condemn a man for not being submissive to an authority he does not accept? Some of what Bill says seems to be him standing up for his personal testimony. It’s clearly not your testimony, and does not fall within the range of a typical LDS testimony. Don’t get me wrong; I am thoroughly confused why someone who sees so much wrong with the LDS institution would want to stay. I don’t get the impression he’s serious (or effective) about driving change from within (which I would respect more). It’s also troubling that he feels his disciplinary councill needs to be public. What does he want to accomplish by letting so many know about his looming council?
SouthernMo Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 19 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: To be right with God begins and ends with obedience. Perhaps. But obedience to what and/or to whom?
Calm Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 21 minutes ago, Duncan said: I though the buffetings of Satan was moving to Calgary, hmm! Nope, moving away from Calgary. 1
Duncan Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 9 minutes ago, Calm said: Nope, moving away from Calgary. I knew you would respond! hahahahaha! 1
Calm Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 Just now, Duncan said: I knew you would respond! hahahahaha! Like a dog returning to her vomit, right? (Got to love Proverbs) 1
Robert F. Smith Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 1 hour ago, SouthernMo said: That’s fine. I take issue with the idea that being right with the LDS church and God are synonymous. I have no problem with that. There are many people I have met whom I respect who do not believe in Mormonism (if there is such a thing). The point is that they do not make scurrilous and silly statements about the LDS faith. They are as respectful of my faith as I am of theirs. 1
AdultConvert Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 I am new so know. nothing about person. But look what happened to CNN White House reporter, Acosta. So disrespectful and obnoxious to Pres Trump, he got his WH pass cancelled. Disruptive dialogue is not acceptable in civil society.
MiserereNobis Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 2 hours ago, Jeanne said: I agree. When I first heard about 2A's..I thought this takes away true justice and the very idea of real repentance. It is a get out of jail free card. From what I've heard about it here, it does seem like the "once saved, always saved" idea that LDS often attack. But I admit my ignorance on this and other temple rituals.
sunstoned Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 12 hours ago, Avatar4321 said: Not familiar with these people but how would any of us know whether they’ve received their second anointing? Tom Phillips said so. He even described the proceedure.
sunstoned Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 8 hours ago, Storm Rider said: And the point still stands - a dozen times? Really? I am supposed to think a dozen times is a real accomplishment? Please! Well, I would guess that most members haven't read the BoM a dozen times. So, yes it is an accomplishment. Give him that at least.
sunstoned Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 12 hours ago, bluebell said: The church has excommunicated members who have received the second anointing before. John D. Lee, Amasas Lyman, James Hamula, and John W. Taylor, for example. Did all of these people have their 2nd anointing? Is there documentation on this?
rodheadlee Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, SouthernMo said: I picture Samuel standing on a wall preaching to the Nephites. I picture Abinadi standing before the priests of Noah. I picture Christ condemning the practices of the Sadducees and Pharasees. I picture Moroni calling to Pahoran for more suppprt. I picture Nephi calling for his brothers to support him. I picture Paul standing in Rome. I could go on and on. These are not examples of meekness and submissiveness, yet we revere all of these men and their actions I illustrate. Bill Reel does not accept the authority of the LDS church. Why would I condemn a man for not being submissive to an authority he does not accept? Some of what Bill says seems to be him standing up for his personal testimony. It’s clearly not your testimony, and does not fall within the range of a typical LDS testimony. Don’t get me wrong; I am thoroughly confused why someone who sees so much wrong with the LDS institution would want to stay. I don’t get the impression he’s serious (or effective) about driving change from within (which I would respect more). It’s also troubling that he feels his disciplinary councill needs to be public. What does he want to accomplish by letting so many know about his looming council? Then why does he care if he is exed or not? (Bolded part) Edited November 17, 2018 by rodheadlee 1
SouthernMo Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 20 minutes ago, rodheadlee said: Then why does he care if he is exed or not? (Bolded part) Agreed. Read the first sentence of the last paragraph of mine you quoted.
Robert F. Smith Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 5 hours ago, SouthernMo said: ................................... Bill Reel does not accept the authority of the LDS church. Why would I condemn a man for not being submissive to an authority he does not accept? Some of what Bill says seems to be him standing up for his personal testimony. It’s clearly not your testimony, and does not fall within the range of a typical LDS testimony. Don’t get me wrong; I am thoroughly confused why someone who sees so much wrong with the LDS institution would want to stay. I don’t get the impression he’s serious (or effective) about driving change from within (which I would respect more). It’s also troubling that he feels his disciplinary councill needs to be public. What does he want to accomplish by letting so many know about his looming council? Bill can froth at the mouth for all I care. That is his right. I think that we would all be more edified, however, if he could at least say something substantial and coherent about Mormonism (if there is such a thing). His notion that everything LDS is wrong in every way and all the time is so extreme that one has to ask whether his problem is actually psychological.
ttribe Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Bill can froth at the mouth for all I care. That is his right. I think that we would all be more edified, however, if he could at least say something substantial and coherent about Mormonism (if there is such a thing). His notion that everything LDS is wrong in every way and all the time is so extreme that one has to ask whether his problem is actually psychological. Completely over the line, Robert. 1
AdultConvert Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 16 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Moderator: Off-topic political posts are being removed.
Gray Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 19 minutes ago, AdultConvert said: Removing one grandstanding reporter (CNN has other reporters and there are hundreds of other reporters from other news outlets) does not violate freedom of the press, it supports it. Acosta constantly harrassed Pres. Trump without allowing him to reply (that is not news gathering or reporting). By not allowing other reporters to have the microphone, bellowing his own hatred and agenda, he was depriving other reporters from actually gathering news. Bless your heart. 3
Avatar4321 Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 On 11/16/2018 at 9:04 AM, rockpond said: Tom Phillips discussed it in an interview with John Dehlin on the Mormon Stories podcast. And why should I take his word for it? 1
Avatar4321 Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 22 hours ago, pogi said: In all of those narratives, "authority" to baptize came before baptism. The disputation is about the visitations. I DID ask for his perspective. Until he can share where he is coming from, you are making as much as an assumption as anyone about how he feels about it - how do you know that this will not bring a huge sense of closure for him? I honestly don't know where you are coming from here. I have not painted him as a caricature of a real person. Where have I done so? What do you base my "uncharitable" feelings on specifically? All I can go on is what he has said: "I always knew..." He only expresses remorse that his families and friends expected some other conclusion, and are therefore feeling hurt because of their dashed expectations. Bill himself, however, had no such expectations and doesn't seem to be feeling as hurt - at least in what he expresses here. He knew this would happen and he willingly chose it. I am not saying that can't make it difficult, but it prohibits me from viewing him as a victim and feeling empathy in that way. I would be feeling more remorse if he truly thought his words/actions were reconcilable with full fellowship and membership in the church. It’s interesting how he spins it that the Church is hurting his family and loved ones. As if he has no choice in what he has said and done to lead to this 1
Avatar4321 Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 19 hours ago, Stargazer said: I have a son who believes that everyone in the family is out to get him, and are his enemies. At various times, he has threatened all of us, collectively and individually, with grievous bodily harm. I kept my bedroom door locked at night because of him. Eventually he made threats that were recorded, and the police and the courts became involved. He no longer lives in the home he grew up in, and I haven't spoken with him since the court hearing when his case was adjudicated, nearly four years ago. I don't know where he lives. I may never see him again, and would worry if I encountered him unexpectedly. His behavior caused all of us a great deal of grief, but we still love him, and hope that he finds happiness. But his behavior made it impossible for him to live in communication with his family. In short, he rejected us, and also all the blessings he might have had as part of the family. Those who reject God have not been rejected by God. They chose the rejection, not the other way around. And anyway, even the Telestial Kingdom is a kingdom of glory. That will be a wonderful blessing, and those who find themselves there will thank God for it. That is absolutely heart breaking. my niece is going down a similar path
Avatar4321 Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 17 hours ago, SouthernMo said: That’s fine. I take issue with the idea that being right with the LDS church and God are synonymous. In what scenario would being right with God put you at odds with His Church? 1
Avatar4321 Posted November 17, 2018 Posted November 17, 2018 16 hours ago, SouthernMo said: I picture Samuel standing on a wall preaching to the Nephites. I picture Abinadi standing before the priests of Noah. I picture Christ condemning the practices of the Sadducees and Pharasees. I picture Moroni calling to Pahoran for more suppprt. I picture Nephi calling for his brothers to support him. I picture Paul standing in Rome. I could go on and on. These are not examples of meekness and submissiveness, yet we revere all of these men and their actions I illustrate. Bill Reel does not accept the authority of the LDS church. Why would I condemn a man for not being submissive to an authority he does not accept? Some of what Bill says seems to be him standing up for his personal testimony. It’s clearly not your testimony, and does not fall within the range of a typical LDS testimony. Don’t get me wrong; I am thoroughly confused why someone who sees so much wrong with the LDS institution would want to stay. I don’t get the impression he’s serious (or effective) about driving change from within (which I would respect more). It’s also troubling that he feels his disciplinary councill needs to be public. What does he want to accomplish by letting so many know about his looming council? Funny, I would use humble, meek, and submissive to describe all of them
Recommended Posts