The Book of Mormon contridicts Mormonism

[_seven7up]

would it not be easier, and less tedious for those of us reading, if you just posted what you thought the doctrine was with regard to your deceased Texans?
...
Your attempts at "gotcha" questions always fall flat and accomplish nothing except some sort of intellectual masturbation ritual for you.
If you think you know better then why be a jerk about it...why not just attempt to prove it?

I have one for you subgenius.

There are 3 trucks carrying pecans, driving across Texas in 1965 with 3 different Truck drivers.

Truck A is on interstate 10, Truck B on Interstate 20, and Truck C on Highway 25.

Please explain, "based solely on the information I have given you" which truck has more pecans? and what the destination of each truck is?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Bazooka's question is equally ridiculous.

Another sad aspect of the discussion is that he thinks that delays in my responses are because I don't have answers for him. Any delay is the result of having more important things to do in my daily life; more important than RE-answering questions which are nothing more than his supposedly clever, "trick questions".

-7up

[_Bazooka]

please, before you go off on your tangents, just answer this^ simple question. Based solely on what I have told you about them, is it man A, B or C?

But still 7up went off on a tangent and refused to answer a very simple question.
Let me pose another, even simpler question, for 7up to avoid answering.

What kind of a plan has the proposition that it is better to not get involved in the first place than to try but fall short?
This proposition also applies to the temple. Better to not take out your endowment in the first place, than to take them it out but fall short of what is required each and every day henceforth.

Remember...
3 For of him unto whom much is given much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation.
..also means that him unto whom nothing is given, nothing is required. This is a very clear doctrinal/scriptural concept which supports what I am saying.

[_seven7up]

But still 7up went off on a tangent and refused to answer a very simple question.

I will leave it up to the other readers of this forum concerning your "simple question" and my response.

There are complexities involved in a proposition whereby unique spirits are being placed into mortality in unique positions in specific times in history. The idea that this is more complex than you admit is clear to everyone, ... except you, apparently.

The bottom line is that you cannot compare one individual to another. We are not in the position to do that. As I already explained, if you put the spirit of one person into the position of another, you may get different results.

What kind of a plan has the proposition that it is better to not get involved in the first place than to try but fall short?
This proposition also applies to the temple. Better to not take out your endowment in the first place, than to take them it out but fall short of what is required each and every day henceforth.

Let's look at these options in order to satisfy your question:
1) Make a noble promise and keep it
2) Don't make a noble promise at all
3) Make a noble promise and don't keep it

Sure. If you take any specific individual and gave them the above options, then we can make a generalization. I placed these in order of better to worse, and I can provide all kinds of examples.

My daughter was scared of taking off the training wheels on her pink bicycle, (which she is growing out of). This year, I promised her that if she learned how to ride her old bike after I took off the training wheels, then I would buy her a new bike (not pink, but a "cool" one). This helped motivate her to learn to ride the bike and practice going on two wheels. She struggled some and I had to run along with her and hold her steady for a few days before she started getting the hang of it, but then she got it down. She is totally happy she did it. So am I. Now back to the options: 1) keep my promise 2) shouldn't have made the promise in the first place 3) break my promise.

Hey, you wanna go bowling? Sure, I love bowling and I like spending time with you. Let's meet up at Big Bowl at 7pm. Um, no. I don't want to make any commitments. Uh ... O.K.

How about a business contract? I had a man and his friend build a gazebo in our back yard recently. We wrote up a contract. Do you think contracts are not useful or wrong?

How about wedding vows Bazooka? Better not to make any vows right? Why promise to be faithful to a spouse?

Remember...
3 For of him unto whom much is given much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation.
..also means that him unto whom nothing is given, nothing is required. This is a very clear doctrinal/scriptural concept which supports what I am saying.

For starters, NOBODY is given "nothing". It is just that some are given more light and opportunity than others. This is not a "Mormon" concept.

This common sense concept was famously paraphrased in Uncle Ben’s words of wisdom to Peter Parker in Spider-man: “With great power comes great responsibility.” Yeah. That makes sense.

Oh, and then there is the lesser known parable of the faithful servant in the Bible, where you find this summary:
For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more. (Luke 12:48)

It is too bad that you have difficulty with simple truths such as this. But that is how it works. You have the free will to reject the light.

-7up

[_Bazooka]

Let's look at these options in order to satisfy your question:
1) Make a noble promise and keep it
2) Don't make a noble promise at all no contact with Mormonism at all during this life
3) Make a noble promise and don't keep it someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards

Sure. If you take any specific individual and gave them the above options, then we can make a generalization. I placed these in order of better to worse, and I can provide all kinds of examples.

<snip>

-7up

So we agree, the person who has no contact with Mormonism at all during this life is in better standing (from a Mormon doctrinal perspective) than someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards.

[_seven7up]

Let's look at these options in order to satisfy your question:
1) Make a noble promise and keep it
2) Don't make a noble promise at all no contact with Mormonism at all during this life
3) Make a noble promise and don't keep it someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards

Sure. If you take any specific individual and gave them the above options, then we can make a generalization. I placed these in order of better to worse, and I can provide all kinds of examples.

<snip>

So we agree, the person who has no contact with Mormonism at all during this life is in better standing (from a Mormon doctrinal perspective) than someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards.

You are comparing two people again, or pretending that you have two individuals who are "blank slates", so to speak. That is not how it works. You cannot compare two distinct individuals. You have to understand LDS doctrine from the perspective of fore-ordination.

The placement of individuals was determined prior to birth. An individual's placement in mortality is based partly on the characteristics of each individual, and while the details are not very clear, individuals may have had some opportunities to participate in deciding on some of the details of the placement.

-7up

[_The Erotic Apologist]

The placement of individuals was determined prior to birth. An individual's placement in mortality is based partly on the characteristics of each individual, and while the details are not very clear, individuals may have had some opportunities to participate in deciding on some of the details of the placement.

-7up

That's right! Those who were valiant in the pre-existence were born into white and delightsome bodies, just like my avatar!

[_Bazooka]

Let's look at these options in order to satisfy your question:
1) Make a noble promise and keep it
2) Don't make a noble promise at all no contact with Mormonism at all during this life
3) Make a noble promise and don't keep it someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards

Sure. If you take any specific individual and gave them the above options, then we can make a generalization. I placed these in order of better to worse, and I can provide all kinds of examples.

<snip>

So we agree, the person who has no contact with Mormonism at all during this life is in better standing (from a Mormon doctrinal perspective) than someone who is exposed to Mormonism but who fails in some way to meet the exacting standards.

You are comparing two people again, or pretending that you have two individuals who are "blank slates", so to speak. That is not how it works. You cannot compare two distinct individuals. You have to understand LDS doctrine from the perspective of fore-ordination.

The placement of individuals was determined prior to birth. An individual's placement in mortality is based partly on the characteristics of each individual, and while the details are not very clear, individuals may have had some opportunities to participate in deciding on some of the details of the placement.

-7up

You can compare as many people as you want. Those individuals to whom nothing is given are blessed to have nothing required of them during this life. That's the doctrine. It's completely inescapable doctrine that any person or persons who are not exposed to the Gospel in this life are better placed than those persons who have been exposed to it but who fail to live up to the increasing expectations. You have confirmed already that you agree with me on this when you said:

Let's look at these options in order to satisfy your question:
1) Make a noble promise and keep it
2) Don't make a noble promise at all
3) Make a noble promise and don't keep it

Foreordination, a separate topic, is complete nonsense.
If Joseph was foreordained to be the Prophet of the Restoration but chose not to, then what? You'd have to have people being foreordained as understudies in the event Joseph let the side down. Then what for them if Joseph steps up to the plate? How much of their foreordination depends on the choices of others? In which case how can they be accountable for what really isn't then their choice because other peoples choices have determined their station in this life?

[_LittleNipper]

See, the above thinking is Mormonism. If GOD foreordains something, man cannot change the inevitable. Mormonism imagines that portions of scripture can be thrown away or left out. True Christians witness God working continually to arrive at His predetermined foreordained destination. If God lows something to happen, He knows exactly what influences it will have. God has His own motives. God is not controlled by man's whims. If Joseph Smith was elected by God to be His prophet, (but I do not believe for one moment that this was ever the case) then as Jonah, he would inevitably do what God wanted him to do. I believe that God allowed Mr. Smith to deceive in order to bring some to repentance and to motivate others to read the Bible with more diligence. This would eventually bring about revival in the 19th century.

[_Bazooka]

I believe that God allowed Mr. Smith to deceive in order to bring some to repentance and to motivate others to read the Bible with more diligence.

Holy smoke. Seriously?

[_LittleNipper]

I believe that God allowed Mr. Smith to deceive in order to bring some to repentance and to motivate others to read the Bible with more diligence.

Holy smoke. Seriously?

What does the Bible have to say concerning Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus? In other words, why was Pharaoh's heart hardened? Now, if God would allow Pharaoh's heart to become hard to demonstrate God's abilities while rescuing a nation, what makes you imagine God would neglect building Christian faith among His chosen at the expense of the foolish.