Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Church leaders condemn political violence


Recommended Posts

Posted
On 1/17/2021 at 2:51 PM, Meadowchik said:

Well I for one and very glad that the church issued this recent statement, in addition to the one in President Oak's October talk.

The recent statement was unnecessary, one might have a good basis to say the President Oak's talk was unnecessary. We have had the Gospel of Chirst for over 2000years. we have had the articles of faiths almost two hundred years.  

Posted
5 minutes ago, provoman said:

The recent statement was unnecessary, one might have a good basis to say the President Oak's talk was unnecessary. We have had the Gospel of Chirst for over 2000years. we have had the articles of faiths almost two hundred years.  

What does one have to do with the other?

Posted
3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

What does one have to do with the other?

The 2000+ year old Gospel of Jesus Christ informs on how people should act, and separately an Article of Faith specifically addresses how members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints should interact with the respective Government.

Posted
16 minutes ago, provoman said:

The recent statement was unnecessary, one might have a good basis to say the President Oak's talk was unnecessary. We have had the Gospel of Chirst for over 2000years. we have had the articles of faiths almost two hundred years.  

We wouldn’t have much scripture at all if we removed all the repetitions. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Calm said:

We wouldn’t have much scripture at all if we removed all the repetitions. 

True. And with continuing revelation, members anticipate possible changes, anyway. Then, in between those circumstances, life can be complicated.

Edited by Meadowchik
Posted
42 minutes ago, provoman said:

The 2000+ year old Gospel of Jesus Christ informs on how people should act, and separately an Article of Faith specifically addresses how members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints should interact with the respective Government.

emphasis on the word "should"

Posted
5 hours ago, provoman said:

The recent statement was unnecessary, one might have a good basis to say the President Oak's talk was unnecessary. We have had the Gospel of Chirst for over 2000years. we have had the articles of faiths almost two hundred years.  

That some of our members are still not going along with it I would argue that the statement is more like to be ‘not enough’. Then again I am not sure there is anything that can break through to some people.

Posted
8 hours ago, provoman said:

The recent statement was unnecessary, one might have a good basis to say the President Oak's talk was unnecessary. We have had the Gospel of Chirst for over 2000years. we have had the articles of faiths almost two hundred years.  

It seems it might of been a good thing to re-state.  This statement coming when it did makes it clear that the church in no way supports or defends the actions of the insurrectionists on January 6th.  Some of those people were clearly Mormon.

Posted
6 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

It seems it might of been a good thing to re-state.  This statement coming when it did makes it clear that the church in no way supports or defends the actions of the insurrectionists on January 6th.  Some of those people were clearly Mormon.

The guy climbing down from Senate balcony was a returned missionary. It is hard to believe that this Captain Moroni cosplayer wasn’t at least partially inspired by Mike Lee’s disgusting fawning over the President and calling him a Captain Moroni equivalent.

Posted
8 hours ago, Calm said:

We wouldn’t have much scripture at all if we removed all the repetitions. 

“The Family: a Proclamation to the World” is pretty much all repetition of precepts that have been with the Latter-day Saints for many generations. Yet contemporary events and conditions have rendered it one of the most timely and prescient messages ever to emanate from the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. 

Posted
20 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

It seems it might of been a good thing to re-state.  This statement coming when it did makes it clear that the church in no way supports or defends the actions of the insurrectionists on January 6th.  Some of those people were clearly Mormon.

Might have. 

Posted
On 1/16/2021 at 5:24 PM, provoman said:

What was not clear about President Oaks talk in October 2020?

The Church Leadership does not need to speak about political issues.

My preference would be the Church stay out of all political discussions.

My preference is the Leadership of the Church teach the Gospel.

Sometimes leaders of religious groups need to take a stand and condemn abhorrent behavior.  The Book  of Mormon hero Captain Moroni did not seem to worry about staying out of politics.

Posted
On 1/17/2021 at 12:24 AM, provoman said:

What was not clear about President Oaks talk in October 2020?

The Church Leadership does not need to speak about political issues.

My preference would be the Church stay out of all political discussions.

My preference is the Leadership of the Church teach the Gospel.

The Book of Mormon documents in detail the destruction of multiple great nations on the American continent because of internal divisions, political intrigues and strife. These are expected to be types of latter-day conditions. The Book of Mormon was written for our day and for our modern prophets to be taking up these issues and strongly warning the membership and fellow countrymen at large is to be expected and yet ominous.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...