Holy Ghost - AWOL again...

[_subgenius]

Actually subgenis, I'm not sure my conclusion is absurd. Rather it seems to be doctrinally based.

not as you typed it

Mormonism believes that God allows bad things to happen to good people. Which means that when this Elder got hit God had the wherewithal to prevent it (regardless of the Elders righteousness and obedience or Spiritual listening skills) but, for His purposes, chose not to.

i agree

I guess as parents we all need to allow our children to make mistakes so that they learn and grow. However, I think death or serious injury is perhaps beyond what I see as acceptable risk in this earthly learning process.

that is a temporal concern, not a spiritual one.

From God's perspective, I get it that Mormos perceive that death, injury etc IS an acceptable risk in order that one learn and grow Eternally.

i am not convinced that you do.

That said, in the face of yet another Elder lost in battle, Monsons sound bite of "when you are on the Lords errand you are entitled to His help" should perhaps carry a health warning...

i would consider a better understanding of the term "entitled" as in - "qualified for or allowed or worthy of being chosen"
Entitled does not guarantee receipt.

[_Drifting]

i would consider a better understanding of the term "entitled" as in - "qualified for or allowed or worthy of being chosen"
Entitled does not guarantee receipt.

Let's go with Websters shall we...

entitled, past participle, past tense of en·ti·tle (Verb)
Verb:
Give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something.
Give (something, esp. a text or work of art) a particular title.
More information »Answers.com - Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary

You are still saying that, even though God could have saved the Elder, and that the Elder was entitled to such help, He made the decision not to. Could you do that to one of your children?

[_subgenius]

You are still saying that, even though God could have saved the Elder, and that the Elder was entitled to such help, He made the decision not to. Could you do that to one of your children?

Yes, i am still saying that.
I could do that for one of my children with, as stated before, if i had a knowledge of the outcome of the events - which is implied by your assumptions (as in i had a sure knowledge that my child would be hit).
When a parent allows their child to be in "unsupervised" situation they always assume the child will make the proper decisions, will heed the warnings, and will basically be "accident free" - even when the child is "known" to be entering a precarious situation.
Why would a parent not do every possible thing in their power to prevent their child from military service? law enforcement? fire-fighting? or any other activity that has, not guaranteed, but an obvious increased risk of injury/fatality than many other activities?
To suggest that there is a statistical divide among circumstances between a loving parent and a negligent one is not a reasonable argument.
besides, i have already stated my position that to consider God's love and wisdom among His children is not wholly equivalent to the human endeavor.

In a larger sense you seem to be approaching the attributes of God with regards to omniscience - an attribute which would likely illuminate the topic.

[_Buffalo]

You are still saying that, even though God could have saved the Elder, and that the Elder was entitled to such help, He made the decision not to. Could you do that to one of your children?

Yes, i am still saying that.
I could do that for one of my children with, as stated before, if i had a knowledge of the outcome of the events - which is implied by your assumptions (as in i had a sure knowledge that my child would be hit).
When a parent allows their child to be in "unsupervised" situation they always assume the child will make the proper decisions, will heed the warnings, and will basically be "accident free" - even when the child is "known" to be entering a precarious situation.
Why would a parent not do every possible thing in their power to prevent their child from military service? law enforcement? fire-fighting? or any other activity that has, not guaranteed, but an obvious increased risk of injury/fatality than many other activities?
To suggest that there is a statistical divide among circumstances between a loving parent and a negligent one is not a reasonable argument.
besides, i have already stated my position that to consider God's love and wisdom among His children is not wholly equivalent to the human endeavor.

In a larger sense you seem to be approaching the attributes of God with regards to omniscience - an attribute which would likely illuminate the topic.

I feel sorry for your kids.

[_Buffalo]

Obviously you view it as an accident that was planned out by God in order to punish the Elder with severe head injuries for spending an extra 13 minutes on scripture study instead of proselytizing (why God chose not to punish other elders for committing similar or worse infractions is just one of those mysteries of godliness).

obviously, you are drawing your own conclusions...i never said anything like this

My thesis is that the accident was random.

and my thesis is that all accidents are by definition are random...thus my notation about "redundancy".

Hope this helps.

...

Mormons don't believe in accidents, as everything that happens has some purpose behind it. And yet, they still use the word accident. My use of the word random addresses this issue.

[_Drifting]

Hi subgenius,

Not really.

As I say in the OP, these young Missionaries are entitled to the Lords protection but far too often they end up getting killed or injured.
I'm not talking about the numpty who stood on the wall of the Lion's enclosure or others that place themselves in unnecessary danger.

I'm talking about the two female Missionaries in South Africa who were dragged into the bushes and raped.
I'm talking about the Elder who was shot when the Minibus in which he was travelling ended up in the middle of a gunfight.
I'm talking about the Elder mown down whilst cycling with his companions.
I'm talking about the Elder in the Op who was smacked by an errant public bus.

The fact is that you do not receive that which you are entitled when you are on a mission and that has nothing to do with worthiness and everything to do with chance.

[_subgenius]

I feel sorry for your kids.

seems only fair, cause they feel sorry for you.

[_Buffalo]

I feel sorry for your kids.

seems only fair, cause they feel sorry for you.

[_subgenius]

Mormons don't believe in accidents, as everything that happens has some purpose behind it. And yet, they still use the word accident. My use of the word random addresses this issue.

First - a more obvious backpedal has yet to be posted.....your use of the word "random" was simply redundant, and rather than admit any sort fallacy being possible within one of your posts, you would rather revise history.
Second - Your statement about Mormon beliefs is incorrect.
Omniscience.
Genesis 18:21
I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.

"The question is not whether God knows a determinate future but whether there is a determinate future to know."

[_subgenius]

Hi subgenius,

Not really.

As I say in the OP, these young Missionaries are entitled to the Lords protection but far too often they end up getting killed or injured.
I'm not talking about the numpty who stood on the wall of the Lion's enclosure or others that place themselves in unnecessary danger.

I'm talking about the two female Missionaries in South Africa who were dragged into the bushes and raped.
I'm talking about the Elder who was shot when the Minibus in which he was travelling ended up in the middle of a gunfight.
I'm talking about the Elder mown down whilst cycling with his companions.
I'm talking about the Elder in the Op who was smacked by an errant public bus.

The fact is that you do not receive that which you are entitled when you are on a mission and that has nothing to do with worthiness and everything to do with chance.

one example or 10 examples - either are cause for your assertion. But if you propose that quantity has influence on it, then the overwhelming number of missionaries who are not "harmed" or "escape" surely contradicts your OP and more likely supports mine.
I completely disagree with your exaggerated claim of "far too often" - though i agree that i would consider one to be one too many, i have also previously stated that a wisdom is present in the wake of these events.

Much, if not all, of your answer may be revealed with a serious contemplation of John 16:33