What's wrong with the TRUTH ?

[_Molok]

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?

I would say this is a matter of holding the church to its own standards of honesty.

http://www.LDS.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?h ... 82620aRCRD

Lying is intentionally deceiving others. Bearing false witness is one form of lying. The Lord gave this commandment to the children of Israel: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” (Exodus 20:16). Jesus also taught this when he was on earth (see Matthew 19:18). There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

The Lord is not pleased with such dishonesty, and we will have to account for our lies. Satan would have us believe it is all right to lie. He says, “Yea, lie a little; … there is no harm in this” (2 Nephi 28:8). Satan encourages us to justify our lies to ourselves. Honest people will recognize Satan’s temptations and will speak the whole truth, even if it seems to be to their disadvantage.

As I said before, purposely withholding information from someone that you know would have a huge impact on their testimony is deceit, regardless of your reason for doing so. Do you not agree?

[_jo1952]

As I said before, purposely withholding information from someone that you know would have a huge impact on their testimony is deceit, regardless of your reason for doing so. Do you not agree?

Hello Molok:

Meh. You are still looking at this from an earthly aspect. God will be our Judge. Vengeance belongs to God, as well. You have purposely avoided addressing the points in my comments in order to hold onto your agenda. Thus, you are doing the same thing as what you accuse the Church of doing. I don't have a problem with this; I merely point it out for demonstration purposes. This will wind up doing you no good; and it will not do good for any whose faith can be destroyed by your agenda. Anyone who purposefully leads another astray, OR who purposely seeks to destroy another's faith in God by tearing away at their belief system, will be held accountable.

Even though the Pharisees were teaching as doctrine the commandments of men, the people's faithfulness to what they believed was counted as righteousness to them. It didn't matter that what they believed was correct or incorrect.

Jesus taught His Apostles that whoever is not against us is on our part. It appears that your agenda has a very high likelihood of turning people away from their faith in God. In this way, you are against Jesus.

We are supposed to keep the two great commandments. There is much wisdom in them. By trying to ensnare the Church in any deceitful practices, even if they ARE guilty, you have also ensnared yourself. It happens that I do think they have used poor choices--but my faith in God is not affected by this knowledge. However, since others ARE affected in a very negative way, I no longer seek to harp upon the weaknesses of men in leadership positions of ANY religion with the intent of causing someone else to give up their belief system, because this can lead to the destruction of another person's faith in God.

We all need to be aware of which camp we are standing in; either in God's camp, or in the adversary's camp.

Blessings,

jo

[_subgenius]

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?

The burden for proof is not upon me, for i am not making the claim. And the reason for my doubts were noted on the post you actually quoted from me..
As for the assumption of truth, that goes without saying, unless there is a reasonable issue to doubt that truth, which in this case there is, both by source and by poster.
The fact that I have not read any refutation by Packer does not make it true and it assumes that Packer is aware of the quote.
The OP is hypothetical at best and offers little by way of meaningful discussion.

[_subgenius]

Page 5 is very revealing from document hyperlinked

only revealing to gossip mongers; it seems that you bothered not to read the whole page you cited.
again the virtues of gossip are hardly worth aspiring to, but you seem determined to master them.
Romans 1:29-32
Proverbs 16:28

[_Molok]

The burden for proof is not upon me, for i am not making the claim. And the reason for my doubts were noted on the post you actually quoted from me..
As for the assumption of truth, that goes without saying, unless there is a reasonable issue to doubt that truth, which in this case there is, both by source and by poster.
The fact that I have not read any refutation by Packer does not make it true and it assumes that Packer is aware of the quote.
The OP is hypothetical at best and offers little by way of meaningful discussion.

Yeah, but you see, Richard Dawkins is well known for not believing in God, whereas Packer has already been on record making statements almost identical to what Quinn attributed to him. So, again, what reason do you doubt the statement, other than you don't particularly like it?

[_Molok]

As I said before, purposely withholding information from someone that you know would have a huge impact on their testimony is deceit, regardless of your reason for doing so. Do you not agree?

Hello Molok:

Meh. You are still looking at this from an earthly aspect. God will be our Judge. Vengeance belongs to God, as well. You have purposely avoided addressing the points in my comments in order to hold onto your agenda. Thus, you are doing the same thing as what you accuse the Church of doing. I don't have a problem with this; I merely point it out for demonstration purposes. This will wind up doing you no good; and it will not do good for any whose faith can be destroyed by your agenda. Anyone who purposefully leads another astray, OR who purposely seeks to destroy another's faith in God by tearing away at their belief system, will be held accountable.

Even though the Pharisees were teaching as doctrine the commandments of men, the people's faithfulness to what they believed was counted as righteousness to them. It didn't matter that what they believed was correct or incorrect.

Jesus taught His Apostles that whoever is not against us is on our part. It appears that your agenda has a very high likelihood of turning people away from their faith in God. In this way, you are against Jesus.

We are supposed to keep the two great commandments. There is much wisdom in them. By trying to ensnare the Church in any deceitful practices, even if they ARE guilty, you have also ensnared yourself. It happens that I do think they have used poor choices--but my faith in God is not affected by this knowledge. However, since others ARE affected in a very negative way, I no longer seek to harp upon the weaknesses of men in leadership positions of ANY religion with the intent of causing someone else to give up their belief system, because this can lead to the destruction of another person's faith in God.

We all need to be aware of which camp we are standing in; either in God's camp, or in the adversary's camp.

Blessings,

jo

If you didn't want to answer my question, just don't post a response. Save your preaching for someone else.

[_Tobin]

If you didn't want to answer my question, just don't post a response. Save your preaching for someone else.

You have yet to provide any evidence of deceit. jo is simply pointing out to you that Mormonism is primarily concerned with getting people to seek and speak with God and you respond by stating you don't want to hear her preach the gospel to you?!? Wow.

Now, you may claim that God is a deceit, but then why are you interested in Mormonism in the first place? And your claims they are deceiving people by asking them to seek and speak with God is highly disingenuous.

[_Molok]

You have yet to provide any evidence of deceit. .

Oh you want evidence of deceit? Please quote from an official LDS source the reason for the priesthood ban, Tobin.

[_Tobin]

You have yet to provide any evidence of deceit. .

Oh you want evidence of deceit? Please quote from an official LDS source the reason for the priesthood ban, Tobin.

What does that have to do with whether or not God exists, we can seek him and speak with him? You seem to be missing the point that I and jo are trying to make to you.

[_Molok]

What does that have to do with whether or not God exists, we can seek him and speak with him? You seem to be missing the point that I and jo are trying to make to you.

It has nothing to do with whether or not God exists, but it has a lot to do with the church being deceitful, which, coincidentally, is what I've been discussing. So, do you have that quote yet?