Apostasy is worse than murder

[stemelbow]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

No, not "virtually every treatment of this topic."

 

"All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against Him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358)

And John A. Widtsoe warned that there is a level of apostasy close to but not necessarily exactly perdition that in among the worst of sins:

"Little is known of the sons of perdition and their destiny, yet that little known stands as a warning to all men. To deal carelessly with truth, to deny it when once gained, to defy the laws of truth which are the laws of God must be counted among the greatest sins. Those who deal lightly with truth in their lives, though they may not become sons of perdition, must expect a heavy punishment, which often begins in mortality. "(Evidences and Reconciliations, pp.212-214)

  

As it were in nearly any church teaching, if you go back, you will find contradiction and confusion.  There remains debate about what past prophets meant in many cases.  To pretend their is no chance for debate or confusion is nonsense.  

[Meadowchik]

4 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

  

As it were in nearly any church teaching, if you go back, you will find contradiction and confusion.  There remains debate about what past prophets meant in many cases.  To pretend their is no chance for debate or confusion is nonsense.  

Exactly. And the authoritarian theology inevitably enhances the concern believers have about the confusing messages.

[Calm]

15 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

They are given to reveal God's words to the church membership, but we also have the right to all manner of revelation, too, according to our faith, just not in an authoritative way for the church.

Do we actually have a right to every type of revelatory experience that any human has participated in or does scripture suggest that some types of revelatory experience might be limited to those with special needs in their callings?

I don’t believe the promise that if anyone lacks wisdom God will give them answers willingly implies that God will reveal in mortality anything asked about to anyone worthy enough to receive just because they are curious or believe it would be uplifting. Revelation throughout scripture serves a purpose, often a clear and precise one. 

If so, then those not called to a purpose of God’s that requires a unique type of revelation (perhaps seeing the destiny of the world such as Moses is a revelation reserved for dispensation openers so they understand the context of their call and their own people’s role in God’s plan to strengthen their commitment and passion) will not have the opportunity to receive that particular knowledge, but their life may be full of revelation pertinent to their own lives and callings. 

Perhaps there is just one ultimate revelatory experience reserved for very few which allows a human to be an aware contributor to God’s mission or if rebellion is chosen, now they understand the existence implications well enough that now there cannot be an unjust or a unmerciful ultimate separation from God.  The separation that occurs is both just because of the evil such have done and it is merciful because they have chosen spiritual self destruction and likely be thus destroyed their ability to exist in a place of glory.

I would not be surprised if it was the type of experience that exposed the Plan of Salvation from beginning to the end in the fullest way absorbable by a human as at that point they would clearly understand the purposes of God and learn whether or not they wanted to align with God. 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Calm

[smac97]

31 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

No, not "virtually every treatment of this topic."

Yes, "virtually every treatment of this topic by leaders of the Church unambiguously characterizes 'blasphemy against the Holy Ghost' as a very rare event."

Quote

"All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against Him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it; and from that time he begins to be an enemy. This is the case with many apostates of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358)

And John A. Widtsoe warned that there is a level of apostasy close to but not necessarily exactly perdition that in among the worst of sins:

"Little is known of the sons of perdition and their destiny, yet that little known stands as a warning to all men. To deal carelessly with truth, to deny it when once gained, to defy the laws of truth which are the laws of God must be counted among the greatest sins. Those who deal lightly with truth in their lives, though they may not become sons of perdition, must expect a heavy punishment, which often begins in mortality. "(Evidences and Reconciliations, pp.212-214)

You've provided nothing to rebut my statement.  Meanwhile, consider these statements (emphases added):

Quote

"It is a very pleasing and consoling thing to know that the Lord will save all of his children, excepting the very few who wilfully rebel against him." - Joseph Fielding Smith
...
"With the Latter-day Saints, this is not so. While it is true we teach that a man must comply with these principles of the gospel in order to receive salvation and exaltation in the kingdom of heaven -- which is proved by many passages of scripture -- nevertheless, we hold out the hope that all may be saved, excepting the sons of perdition, a class that wilfully rejects the atonement of the Savior, for the Lord intends to save all the workmanship of his hands, save these few who will not receive salvation.  Our doctrine consigns none others to perdition, but holds forth the hope that all will eventually be saved in some degree of glory." - Joseph Fielding Smith
...
"This extreme punishment will not be given to any but the sons of perdition. Even the wicked of the earth who never knew the power of God, after they have paid the price of their sinning -- for they must suffer the excruciating torment which sin will bring -- shall at last come forth from the prison house, repentant and willing to bow the knee and acknowledge Christ, to receive some influence of the Spirit of God in the telestial kingdom." - Joseph Fielding Smith
...
"It is probable that only personages who have acquired similar full knowledge, who willfully and deliberately deny the truth, when they know it to be the truth, can commit the unpardonable sin and become sons of perdition. They are sons of perdition because, 'Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to open shame' (D. & C. 76:35). They must have had a fullness of knowledge; a testimony which cannot be destroyed. One must be on a high eminence to fall so low; and few in world’s history have attained such a height. It is doubtful if even Judas, who betrayed Jesus, was sufficiently enlightened to become a son of perdition (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 545). Cain was called Perdition because of his sin, but it is added 'for thou wast also before the world,' implying a reason from out of the pre-existent world, for this heavy punishment (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 5:24)." - John A. Widtsoe
...
"Moreover, the expression, sons of perdition, is often used in the scriptures to describe disciples of Satan, all who defy God and teach untruth, and who delight in lies, without necessarily committing the unpardonable sin. The many brethren and sisters who have propounded questions about the sons of perdition may rest secure that with their present knowledge they cannot become sons of perdition." - John A. Widtsoe
...
"According to Mormon doctrine, the bodies of all who have had a mortal existence upon earth will be resurrected from the grave. The atonement of Jesus Christ knows no exceptions (Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 19:22). Yet, after the resurrection comes the judgment. The acts on earth may forfeit many of the possible gifts following earth existence (Ibid., 3 Nephi 26:4, 5). The spiritual redemption, which is part of the redemption from the grave, will apparently be denied the sons of perdition. That appears to be the meaning of the statements that 'he [the Lord] saves all except them'; and that they are, 'the only ones on whom the second death shall have power" (D & C 76:38, 43, 44). They who will be judged to be sons of perdition will arise from the grave with their bodies, but their bodies will be of no use to them, as the 'second death' is meted out to them in the final judgment." - John A. Widtsoe

There is no reasonable, informed approach to the Restored Gospel that yields the result of equating "apostasy" as being equivalent to "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost."

If there were a candidate for a "Son of Perdition," it would be Judas, the apostle to betrayed Jesus Christ.  So what does the Church have to say about such an idea?  Well, in the absence of specific revelation on the subject, we have this:

Quote

Speculation as to individual sons of perdition is at best unprofitable. Some have consigned Judas Iscariot to this doom, based on certain scriptural passages. (See John 12:6; 6:70; 17:12; Acts 1:20.) President Joseph F. Smith questions this interpretation:

“To my mind it strongly appears that not one of the disciples possessed sufficient light, knowledge nor wisdom, at the time of the crucifixion, for either exaltation or condemnation; for it was afterward that their minds were opened to understand the scriptures, and that they were endowed with power from on high; without which they were only children in knowledge, in comparison to what they afterwards became under the influence of the Spirit.” (The Miracle of Forgiveness, pp.125-127)

And this (same link):

Quote

It is doubtful if even Judas, who betrayed Jesus, was sufficiently enlightened to become a son of perdition (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 545).

What you are saying about us is false, Meadowchik.  We neither teach nor believe the things you are attributing to us.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 7, 2020 by smac97

[Calm]

Quote

t would be one thing if the litmus test for identifying God was something well-defined and demonstrated, but how does God objectively prove His attributes?

This seems to ignore the Atonement and the ability to become of one heart and mind with God. 

[Meadowchik]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

This seems to ignore the Atonement and the ability to become of one heart and mind with God. 

I don't think so. To me, it meant that faith will always be a part of life and exaltation.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

As it were in nearly any church teaching, if you go back, you will find contradiction and confusion.  There remains debate about what past prophets meant in many cases.  To pretend their is no chance for debate or confusion is nonsense.  

I am willing to concede that "confusion" on this issue exists.  But only because those who persist in being confused are wantonly, wilfully so.  Because they are relying on profound ignorance, distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

• “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
• “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” ― Benjamin Franklin
• “No matter how busy you may think you are, you must find time for reading, or surrender yourself to self-chosen ignorance.” ― Atwood H. Townsend
• “Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” ― Benjamin Franklin

This is not a very hard topic to study.  The teachings of the Church about it, and the beliefs of the Saints about it, are being willfully distorted and mischaracterized.

No reasonable, informed Latter-day Saint believes the things Meadowchik and Sam Young are attributing to us.  The Church does not teach the things they are attributing to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 7, 2020 by smac97

[Meadowchik]

30 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes, "virtually every treatment of this topic by leaders of the Church unambiguously characterizes 'blasphemy against the Holy Ghost' as a very rare event."

You've provided nothing to rebut my statement.  Meanwhile, consider these statements (emphases added):

There is no reasonable, informed approach to the Restored Gospel that yields the result of equating "apostasy" as being equivalent to "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost."

If there were a candidate for a "Son of Perdition," it would be Judas, the apostle to betrayed Jesus Christ.  So what does the Church have to say about such an idea?  Well, in the absence of specific revelation on the subject, we have this:

And this (same link):

What you are saying about us is false, Meadowchik.  We neither teach nor believe the things you are attributing to us.

Thanks,

-Smac

Joseph Smith himself rebuts your statement. 

"This is the case with many apostates of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358)

Not just "a very rare number" of people, but "many apostates." A person can look at this and reasonably conclude that those many will be worse off in the eternal realm than murderers.

And John A. Widtsoe (also quoted above) warns of the real danger people have of committed offenses close to it by virtue of apostasy.

 

This type of thinking where spiritual crimes are above or on par with murder is not unprecedented in Colonial America. Seventeenth-century Salem saw women executed for witchcraft while in the same time period a murderer was merely fined. One could say that Joseph Smith's view was more liberal, in that it specifically defined the spiritual crime and made it arguably more objective.

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Meadowchik

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am willing to concede that "confusion" on this issue exists.  But only because those who are confused are wantonly, wilfully so.  Because they are relying on profound ignorance, distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

• “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
• “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” ― Benjamin Franklin
• “No matter how busy you may think you are, you must find time for reading, or surrender yourself to self-chosen ignorance.” ― Atwood H. Townsend
• “Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” ― Benjamin Franklin

This is not a very hard topic to study.  The teachings of the Church about it, and the beliefs of the Saints about it, are being willfully distorted and mischaracterized.

No reasonable, informed Latter-day Saint believes the things Meadowchik and Sam Young are attributing to us.  The Church does not teach the things they are attributing to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

I've heard your opinion and disagree for the most part.  I think I get where you're coming from, but I also know how things go.  Go ahead and leave the Church.  Be as kind and thoughtful to your loved ones as you can in doing so, and then watch and see what happens.  Some are gracious and kind, others are nearly the opposite.  It's not a clear and precise concept in member's minds--what leaving means, what effect it might have, or what it says about the leaver.  It's anything but neat and clean.  Obviously what you are missing here is Sam's perspective.  He's not just one who left the Church and is facing family criticism.  He's outspoken and was forced out.  He's likely seen precisely how believers see such an one.  Again, though, I'm not saying he's exactly correct.  I'm not even arguing whether he's trying to be fair to the whole of believers or the whole of the teachings of the Church.  I'm just saying his perspective is different and that doesn't make him a liar.  

[Meadowchik]

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am willing to concede that "confusion" on this issue exists.  But only because those who are confused are wantonly, wilfully so.  Because they are relying on profound ignorance, distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

• “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
• “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” ― Benjamin Franklin
• “No matter how busy you may think you are, you must find time for reading, or surrender yourself to self-chosen ignorance.” ― Atwood H. Townsend
• “Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” ― Benjamin Franklin

This is not a very hard topic to study.  The teachings of the Church about it, and the beliefs of the Saints about it, are being willfully distorted and mischaracterized.

No reasonable, informed Latter-day Saint believes the things Meadowchik and Sam Young are attributing to us.  The Church does not teach the things they are attributing to it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Joseph Smith did teach it. The church has had ongoing difficulties with teaching with consistency. That some members may be confused by the murkiness, or forced to discount some contradicting statements in favor of others that seem to hold more authority to them would be understandable.

[smac97]

12 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I don't think so. To me, it meant that faith will always be a part of life and exaltation.

That seems at odds with the teachings of the scriptures.  Faith is, by definition, to "not have a perfect knowledge" (Alma 32:21).  But although we cannot have this "perfect knowledge," although we "cannot know of surety at first, unto perfection" (Alma 32:26) (emphasis added), we can, in time arrive at it.

I think the day will come when we will obtain "knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:13).

As Paul put it, "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known"  (1 Cor. 13:12).

Knowledge gained through study and also by faith is obtained "line upon line and precept upon precept" (D&C 98:11-12;128:21).

"That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day" (D&C 50:24).

Apparently the Brother of Jared attained a "perfect knowledge of God," such that "he could not be kept from within the veil" (Ether 3:20).

"And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things" (Moroni 10:5).

"It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance" (D&C 131:6).

I'm not trying to tell you what to believe on this point.  I'm just explaining what we believe, in the hope that it will clarify things.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Meadowchik]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

That seems at odds with the teachings of the scriptures.  Faith is, by definition, to "not have a perfect knowledge" (Alma 32:21).  But although we cannot have this "perfect knowledge," although we "cannot know of surety at first, unto perfection" (Alma 32:26) (emphasis added), we can, in time arrive at it.

I think the day will come when we will obtain "knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:13).

As Paul put it, "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known"  (1 Cor. 13:12).

Knowledge gained through study and also by faith is obtained "line upon line and precept upon precept" (D&C 98:11-12;128:21).

"That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day" (D&C 50:24).

Apparently the Brother of Jared attained a "perfect knowledge of God," such that "he could not be kept from within the veil" (Ether 3:20).

"And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things" (Moroni 10:5).

"It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance" (D&C 131:6).

I'm not trying to tell you what to believe on this point.  I'm just explaining what we believe, in the hope that it will clarify things.

Thanks,

-Smac

I think clarity is a good goal.

[Calm]

At this point in our existence we can imagine a state similar to a perfect Matrix where we are unaware we are living in a fantasy, but can’t imagine how we just using our consciousnesses could determine from the inside we were actually inside or there is an outside. 

Given the massive increase in knowledge and experience that someone similar to our view of God would have, there is no reason to assume imo this state of affairs continues such that God can’t tell if he is in a dream or not. 
 

Thus is we become one with God and have access to his heightened awareness, it likely won’t require faith to accept he is God. 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Calm

[smac97]

52 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Joseph Smith himself rebuts your statement. 

No, he doesn't.

Quote

"This is the case with many apostates of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.358)
Not just "a very rare number" of people, but "many apostates."

And the wanton ignorance and distortion continues.

Context.  It's an important thing.  

Joseph Smith was speaking of the people in 1844.  And how many are "many apostates"?  How many of these people met the description of "Sons of Perdition"?

Those who have "suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth" (D&C 76:31), who "are vessels of wrath" (D&C 76:33), who "denied the Holy Spirit after having received it" (D&C 76:35), who "denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame" (D&C 76:35), who "{had} the heavens opened unto {them}" (TPJS, p. 358), who "kn{e}w God, and then sin{ned} against Him" (id.), who "sinned against the Holy Ghost," who "{said} that the sun does not shine while {they saw} it" (id.), who "den{ied} Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto {them}" (id.), who "den{ied} the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it" (id.), who "are not merely wicked; they are incorrigibly evil" (EoM, "Sons of Perdition")?

How many apostates meet the parameters set forth above?  Very few, I think.  I think many of the people who have committed apostasy (most?  nearly all?) have not done so from a position of strength and ascendant spiritual maturity , and have instead ran into trouble arising from pride, ignorance, confusion, and so on.  Frankly, many apostates I have met seem fairly ignorant of some very basic precepts and lack spiritual maturity.  And in that lack of maturity these people will be shown leniency and mercy.  Only those who "receive the Holy Ghost" and "have the heavens opened unto him" and "know God" and then "sin against him" by "deny[ing] Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him" are potentially imperiled.

I'm not particularly interested in trying to sort out who will be a Son of Perdition and who will not.  My heart is quieted by knowing that God is just.  

Meanwhile, you continue to misrepresent and distort what we believe, and what we teach.

No informed Latter-day Saint believes that "apostasy" is "worse than murder."

Quote

A person can look at this and reasonably conclude that those many will be worse off in the eternal realm than murderers.

No, they can't.  No such conclusion is drawn from "reason."  Such a conclusion can only be drawn through profound ignorance (including, it seems, wanton and deliberate ignorance), distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

No reasonable, informed Latter-day Saint believes the things Meadowchik and Sam Young are attributing to us.  The Church does not teach the things they are attributing to it.

I recognize that this is repetitive.  But as long as you persist in repeating falsehoods about us, I will persist in rebutting them.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 7, 2020 by smac97

[pogi]

4 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Calm started this thread to discuss the topic and I am discussing the topic, regardless of whether Sam Young has anything to do with it.

This thread is about Sam Young's quote.  We have have been arguing against his comment, and you have been defending it.  Now it seems you want to distance yourself from his comment.  Ok, great.  Happy to see that!  I don't have much of a problem with your last conclusion, if your only point is that it is hypothetically possible (because you don't have any examples) that a member in good faith can believe that apostasy is worse than murder.  I will grant you that hypothetical possibility, but strongly doubt that even one member exists who believes that way - but it is hypothetically possible.  I have seen stranger things, after all!

Edited January 7, 2020 by pogi

[smac97]

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I've heard your opinion and disagree for the most part. 

Quelle suprise! 😁

My "opinion" is informed.  The "opinion" being shared by Sam Young and Meadowchik is borne of ignorance, distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I think I get where you're coming from, but I also know how things go.  Go ahead and leave the Church. 

No, thanks.  I'm quite happy with being a member of the Church.  I really believe it is what it claims to be.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Be as kind and thoughtful to your loved ones as you can in doing so, and then watch and see what happens. 

I'm actually in that process, albeit on the other side.  I have recently watched a number of loved ones leave the Church.  What has happened?  We have repeatedly and emphatically expressed continuing love and affection for them.  We have reaffirmed our continuing relationship with them.  We have invited them to discuss matters that precipitated their decisions to leave the Church.

There has been sadness and tears, and a few missteps, yes.  But no anger.  No malice.  And certainly no suggestion that they have done something "worse than murder."  That damnable falsehood, being perpetuated by Sam Young and Meadowchik, has played no part in these events.  Why?  Because we do not believe such a thing.  Why do we not believe such a thing?  Because the family members who remain in the Church are not acting based on ignorance, distortion of the teachings of the Church, bad faith, or some combination of these.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Some are gracious and kind, others are nearly the opposite. 

You are only proving my point.  If (some few) members of the Church have reacted to others leaving the Church by accusing those others of committing a sin "worse than murder," they are doing so in contravention of, and likely in ignorance of, the teachings of the Church.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It's not a clear and precise concept in member's minds--what leaving means, what effect it might have, or what it says about the leaver.  It's anything but neat and clean. 

Then presuming to read their minds and conclude that they are thinking the "leavers" have committed a sin "worse than murder" is not apt.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Obviously what you are missing here is Sam's perspective. 

I'm not particularly interested in "Sam's perspective."  He was talking about what we believe.  He was attributing teachings and beliefs to us.

I am rebutting Sam Young.  What he is saying about us is false.  Plainly and flagrantly false.  

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

He's not just one who left the Church and is facing family criticism.  He's outspoken and was forced out. 

So what?  "Family criticism" is not a basis for publicly, and falsely, asserting that we believe that "apostasy" is "worse than murder."  No informed Latter-day Saint believes that, and the Church doesn't teach it.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

He's likely seen precisely how believers see such an one. 

Oh, brother.  Sheer speculation.

29 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Again, though, I'm not saying he's exactly correct.  I'm not even arguing whether he's trying to be fair to the whole of believers or the whole of the teachings of the Church.  I'm just saying his perspective is different and that doesn't make him a liar.  

No informed, observant member of the Church equates "apostasy" with "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost."  The Church does not teach this.

So Sam Young is either speaking in ignorance, or he is deliberately misrepresenting the teachings of the Church and the beliefs of its members.  Given his long experience in the Church, I'm not inclined to chalk up his false statement to ignorance.  That leaves willful (or perhaps reckless) misrepresentation.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

29 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I think clarity is a good goal.

So do I.

Clarity is hindered by people perpetuating falsehoods about what Latter-day Saints teach and believe about "Sons of Perdition."

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

44 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Joseph Smith did teach it.

No, he did not.  

44 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

The church has had ongoing difficulties with teaching with consistency.

Not really.

44 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That some members may be confused by the murkiness, or forced to discount some contradicting statements in favor of others that seem to hold more authority to them would be understandable.

Nope.  Again, the teachings of the Church on this point are not esoteric.  As Elder Andersen put it, "{t}rue principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find."

You persist in misrepresenting what we teach to each other and what we believe.  I will continue to point that out as long as you do it.

No reasonable, informed member of the Church believes that "apostasy" is "worse than murder," that it is equivalent to "blasphemy against the Holy Ghost."  This is not what the Church teaches, nor what the members believe.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Metis_LDS]

IMO this thread is some kinda of experiment to see how long members of the Church will flog a dead horse.  Yep I am sure the horse is quite dead now.  But do not stop flogging it just because of me!

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

IMO this thread is some kinda of experiment to see how long members of the Church will flog a dead horse.  Yep I am sure the horse is quite dead now.  But do not stop flogging it just because of me!

Yes, I see your point.  However, I cannot let a falsehood about what we teach and believe be the last word.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Metis_LDS]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes, I see your point.  However, I cannot let a falsehood about what we teach and believe be the last word.

Thanks,

-Smac

I am a fan of yours.  I do not see how you can force these persons to agree.  Have you thought about the longer this goes on the worse it will look.  People will say it must have some truth or else why is the thread so long.  The longer this gets the fewer will read it all.

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

I am a fan of yours.  I do not see how you can force these persons to agree. 

I'm not looking to do that.

2 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

Have you thought about the longer this goes on the worse it will look.  People will say it must have some truth or else why is the thread so long.  The longer this gets the fewer will read it all.

Hmm.  I'll think on that.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

I am a fan of yours.  I do not see how you can force these persons to agree.  Have you thought about the longer this goes on the worse it will look.  People will say it must have some truth or else why is the thread so long.  The longer this gets the fewer will read it all.

I agree with Smac that a falsehood ought to be rebutted as often as it appears or is repeated. Otherwise the falsehood stands a greater chance of misleading those who don’t know any better. 
 

To use your proverbial analogy (and I like horses, so I’ll change it a bit) it is not beating a dead animal if the animal is not indeed dead but continues to rear it’s vicious and ugly head. 

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

 People will say it must have some truth or else why is the thread so long.  The longer this gets the fewer will read it all.

From my observation, the longer it goes on, the further they distance themselves from Sam's comments.  In really long threads I might read the first few pages and the last few pages to see how it has evolved.  If people do that, they will see that no one is really defending Sam's comment anymore. 

[Calm]

28 minutes ago, Metis_LDS said:

I am a fan of yours.  I do not see how you can force these persons to agree.  Have you thought about the longer this goes on the worse it will look.  People will say it must have some truth or else why is the thread so long.  The longer this gets the fewer will read it all.

But they don’t need to read too many pages to see where it is headed since the tail end has been pretty much all repetition.  And I agree with Pogi reading the ends provides enough context to make the effort worthwhile. I added a note to the opening post to suggest that would work. 
 

It is rather shocking at this length it is still on topic. 
 

I flagged (as in you might want to consider the point, not violation) your post to the mods to let them consider if it has value to stay open...more readers of an open thread than closed after all. Repetition slants it towards closing though. otoh, board has been slow lately and the thread has been confrontative, but not that contentious.  So who knows what they will decide. 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Calm