Philo Sofee wrote:I would think with the priesthood, missionaries would be sent there to heal that area, not flee from it.
File this story under, "More proof they don't really think it's true."
It’s relatively easy to agree that only Homo sapiens can speak about things that don’t really exist, and believe six impossible things before breakfast. You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.
This isn't about priesthood blessings. It is about protecting the missionaries from this contagion. Mormonism carries no protection against the plague.
moksha wrote:This isn't about priesthood blessings. It is about protecting the missionaries from this contagion. Mormonism carries no protection against the plague.
I think you've got it. The plague will take down whom it will. I don't think being a member of the church and holding the priesthood is any guarantee against the natural spread of a virulent disease/contagion.
But if you folks have enough faith/expectation and really think that priesthood power/holders can/should march around raising the entire populace infected with this unfortunate contagion/plague...more power to you.
mentalgymnast wrote:I think you've got it. The plague will take down whom it will. I don't think being a member of the church and holding the priesthood is any guarantee against the natural spread of a virulent disease/contagion.
No kidding Einstein.
But if you folks have enough faith/expectation and really think that priesthood power/holders can/should march around raising the entire populace infected with this unfortunate contagion/plague...more power to you.
It's organizations like the LDS church that like to pretend they have the power to heal until events like this happen.
mentalgymnast wrote:I think you've got it. The plague will take down whom it will. I don't think being a member of the church and holding the priesthood is any guarantee against the natural spread of a virulent disease/contagion.
No kidding Einstein.
There seem to be some folks here that would think otherwise. At least you and I are in agreement.
mentalgymnast wrote:I think you've got it. The plague will take down whom it will. I don't think being a member of the church and holding the priesthood is any guarantee against the natural spread of a virulent disease/contagion.
No kidding Einstein.
mentalgymnast wrote:There seem to be some folks here that would think otherwise. At least you and I are in agreement.
Regards, MG
Oaks for instance:
We know that the prayer of faith, uttered alone or in our homes or places of worship, can be effective to heal the sick.
For this audience—adults who hold the Melchizedek Priesthood and young men who will soon receive this power—I will concentrate my remarks on healing blessings involving the power of the priesthood. We have this priesthood power, and we should all be prepared to use it properly. Current increases in natural disasters and financial challenges show that we will need this power even more in the future than in the past.
If Oaks believes what he says, why take Priesthood Power away as per the OP article? Was he lying MG, or do you think he’s wrong and you are right? Can you explain why he thinks “otherwise”?
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
I have a question wrote:If Oaks believes what he says, why take Priesthood Power away as per the OP article? Was he lying MG, or do you think he’s wrong and you are right? Can you explain why he thinks “otherwise”?
I think the safety of the missionaries is of primary concern to the church and to the families that sent their sons and daughters out into the world.
mentalgymnast wrote:There seem to be some folks here that would think otherwise. At least you and I are in agreement.
Regards, MG
But the church claims differently then you and I.
I think we need to look at everything contextually. And with a dose of pragmatism. Some here seem to disagree with looking at things with a healthy serving of reality.
Reductionist/fundamentalist/black and white sort of thinking, in my opinion.
I think the safety of the missionaries is of primary concern to the church and to the families that sent their sons and daughters out into the world.
Good thing you're not in charge.
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door; Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors. One focal point in a random world can change your direction: One step where events converge may alter your perception.