What's wrong with the TRUTH ?

[_Molok]

when it comes to a statement being considered as "factual" or "accurate" as presented by someone who is hostile toward the individual(s) then yes.
If i posted that i had a conversation with Richard Dawkins and he told me that he actually believes in God but just wanted to sell a lot of books...should we consider that as truth? especially if i put it forth as a criticism of Dawkins and/or atheism?

Quinn would be a primary source for the comment, since he was there for the statement. Do you have any particular reason to doubt the veracity of the statement, other than not liking it? Has Packer ever denied saying it, for instance?

[_Molok]

Remember, this is the same guy who wrote

There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it was worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.

https://byustudies.BYU.edu/PDFLibrary/2 ... 25bfe6.pdf

So it's not like that statement would be wildly out of character.

[_jo1952]

Remember, this is the same guy who wrote

There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it was worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.

https://byustudies.BYU.edu/PDFLibrary/2 ... 25bfe6.pdf

So it's not like that statement would be wildly out of character.

1 Corinthians 10:23 (KJV)

All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Blessings,

jo

[_Molok]

1 Corinthians 10:23 (KJV)

All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Blessings,

jo

I'm sorry, am I supposed to take from your quote that you feel it is a good thing to purposely hide unpleasant facts about history from church members?

[_jo1952]

I'm sorry, am I supposed to take from your quote that you feel it is a good thing to purposely hide unpleasant facts about history from church members?

Hello Molok,

I am just showing a precedent from the Bible which teaches one of many principles we can apply to something we are experiencing today. The same principles existed in the ancient church which exist in today's churches. In fact, these principles exist in all aspects of our lives; not just the religious aspect. If people receive what they perceive as truth which they are not ready for, all types of unforeseen consequences can result; regardless of whether or not what they are looking at really is truth. Results will change from person to person depending upon their life experiences, world view, etc. If we have not established an ability to discern earthly AND spiritual Truth, then when we are faced with deciding if something we are seeing is even True or not, we are starting off with a handicap. Once we have the ability to discern, then we can toss out what is false, and hang on to what is Truth. As our ability to receive Truth increases, we can deal appropriately with new Truth. There is nothing new here. I'm just reminding the readers; that's all.

Shouldn't our purpose be to only share Truth which can edify rather than destroy our own faith, or the faith of another; regardless of our/their belief system? Our choices should center on whether or not the agenda/purpose of our actions is to keep the two great commandments. If our choices are purposed to destroy another's faith in God, then our actions are manifesting to God that we do NOT love Him. "He that has ears to hear, let him hear."

Matthew 22:37-40 (KJV)

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

To the anti-LDS readers: these verses say nothing about believing in the "correct" nature of God, believing in a creedal God, having a perfectly correct knowledge about God, first obtaining All Truth about God, or Judging another's beliefs about God, as a prerequisite to keeping the first great commandment. Adding such restrictions to another's beliefs about God whose beliefs may not agree with yours, inevitably prevents a person from keeping the second great commandment.

Blessings,

jo

[_Mittens]

Remember, this is the same guy who wrote

There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it was worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.

https://byustudies.BYU.edu/PDFLibrary/2 ... 25bfe6.pdf

So it's not like that statement would be wildly out of character.

Page 5 is very revealing from document hyperlinked

[_Mittens]

I'm sorry, am I supposed to take from your quote that you feel it is a good thing to purposely hide unpleasant facts about history from church members?

Hello Molok,

I am just showing a precedent from the Bible which teaches one of many principles we can apply to something we are experiencing today. The same principles existed in the ancient church which exist in today's churches. In fact, these principles exist in all aspects of our lives; not just the religious aspect. If people receive what they perceive as truth which they are not ready for, all types of unforeseen consequences can result; regardless of whether or not what they are looking at really is truth. Results will change from person to person depending upon their life experiences, world view, etc. If we have not established an ability to discern earthly AND spiritual Truth, then when we are faced with deciding if something we are seeing is even True or not, we are starting off with a handicap. Once we have the ability to discern, then we can toss out what is false, and hang on to what is Truth. As our ability to receive Truth increases, we can deal appropriately with new Truth. There is nothing new here. I'm just reminding the readers; that's all.

Shouldn't our purpose be to only share Truth which can edify rather than destroy our own faith, or the faith of another; regardless of our/their belief system? Our choices should center on whether or not the agenda/purpose of our actions is to keep the two great commandments. If our choices are purposed to destroy another's faith in God, then our actions are manifesting to God that we do NOT love Him. "He that has ears to hear, let him hear."

Matthew 22:37-40 (KJV)

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

To the anti-LDS readers: these verses say nothing about believing in the "correct" nature of God, believing in a creedal God, having a perfectly correct knowledge about God, first obtaining All Truth about God, or Judging another's beliefs about God, as a prerequisite to keeping the first great commandment. Adding such restrictions to another's beliefs about God whose beliefs may not agree with yours, inevitably prevents a person from keeping the second great commandment.

Blessings,

jo

Actually you miss quoted this verse, since the First and greatest command is something a Mormon refuses to follow

Mark 12:
29 Jesus answered him, “The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.
30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment.
31 And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ £ There is no other commandment greater than these.”


Mormons ignore this and believe "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is three" So Jesus agrees with Creedal Theology and Mormons are Wrong


Joseph Smith said the Trinity is three gods.

"I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods," (Teachings of Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 370).

[_Molok]

Shouldn't our purpose be to only share Truth which can edify rather than destroy our own faith, or the faith of another; regardless of our/their belief system?
jo

Here's my opinion on that. If you purposely keep information from someone in order to create a false impression in their mind, you are deceiving them. If you have to resort to deceit to keep people in church, all you are ensuring is that when they find out the information that was not told to them (and with the internet, and Mormonism becoming more mainstream, it is only a matter of time before they hear the information) they will feel betrayed by their church leaders, and quite possibly very angry.

[_Tobin]

Shouldn't our purpose be to only share Truth which can edify rather than destroy our own faith, or the faith of another; regardless of our/their belief system?
jo

Here's my opinion on that. If you purposely keep information from someone in order to create a false impression in their mind, you are deceiving them. If you have to resort to deceit to keep people in church, all you are ensuring is that when they find out the information that was not told to them (and with the internet, and Mormonism becoming more mainstream, it is only a matter of time before they hear the information) they will feel betrayed by their church leaders, and quite possibly very angry.

What information do you think jo, or the Church, is keeping from people exactly? The truth is there is a God and I really can't understand what is being hidden from people to keep them from seeking and experiencing that God. I'd be highly interested in what information you are going to provide that is more enlightening about God than what the gospel provides already.

[_jo1952]

Here's my opinion on that. If you purposely keep information from someone in order to create a false impression in their mind, you are deceiving them. If you have to resort to deceit to keep people in church, all you are ensuring is that when they find out the information that was not told to them (and with the internet, and Mormonism becoming more mainstream, it is only a matter of time before they hear the information) they will feel betrayed by their church leaders, and quite possibly very angry.

Hello Molok,

The Old Testament already teaches us how time after time the Children of Israel turned away from God. The New Testament taught us many times that there were already false teachers and false prophets among the members of the church. What makes you think that there are no false teachers and false prophets in the LDS Church? How is it that people want to hold the LDS Church to a different standard than the previous 7600 years or so of God's history with His children on our earth?

Members of all churches will feel betrayed and disillusioned from time to time. This is why the church went through a Reformation, why we see the development of a myriad of denominations, why there was a need for a Restoration, why we see transitions from one denomination to another denomination. It is also why we see individuals drifting between belief and non-belief; to and from Atheism or to and from Agnosticism throughout the history of mankind. How strong their faith is in God and how strong their relationship is with God, will determine how they respond to feelings of betrayal or disillusionment at any given time.

The only real difference between today and yesteryear you have already identified! That is the speed at which people can access information. The records of the ancient church have so often been victimized by burning and other attempts to destroy them; or have simply been hidden from the public (sounds familiar!) and are simply not available to us like current records are. As such, no type of scientific comparison can accurately be made between the ancient church and the churches of today. Therefore, ANY conclusions reached are based upon severely incomplete comparable data. So, I will repeat:

1 Corinthians 10:23 (KJV)

All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Blessings,

jo