Regrets over resigning?

[_Tobin]

Are you familiar with the LDS belief in the Great Apostasy?

So are you really claiming that the Great Apostasy invalidating all LDS claims was sparked by the LDS leadership deciding to delay the age when someone can be baptized?

[_Kishkumen]

So are you really claiming that the Great Apostasy invalidating all LDS claims was sparked by the LDS leadership deciding to delay the age when someone can be baptized?

I wouldn't rule it out. It is not as though these things happen all at once. The Great Apostasy is seen as a process. As a process, its parameters and duration are not well defined. On top of all of the other things the LDS Church has messed up, this is a new low, and as such it very well might represent the breaking point.

I don't rule it out, and I am inclined to think that it is an important event, if not the straw that broke the camel's back.

In any case, I think the argument can be made.

[_Tobin]

I wouldn't rule it out. It is not as though these things happen all at once. The Great Apostasy is seen as a process. As a process, its parameters and duration are not well defined. On top of all of the other things the LDS Church has messed up, this is a new low, and as such it very well might represent the breaking point.

I don't rule it out, and I am inclined to think that it is an important event, if not the straw that broke the camel's back.

In any case, I think the argument can be made.

Sorry, but what? This is the straw that broke the camel's back? Joseph Smith was marrying and sleeping with girls. And let's not forget that for over a century the LDS Church was a racist organization denying blacks the priesthood. Yet, simply because the LDS Church decides 170 years later to delay the age when certain children are allowed to be baptized, that kicks off the Great Apostasy. I hope you understand why I'm very incredulous about your reasoning here.

[_sock puppet]

So are you really claiming that the Great Apostasy invalidating all LDS claims was sparked by the LDS leadership deciding to delay the age when someone can be baptized?

What date and event does the LDS Church claim marked Peter's church's Great Apostasy?

[_Kishkumen]

Sorry, but what? This is the straw that broke the camel's back? Joseph Smith was marrying and sleeping with girls. And let's not forget that for over a century the LDS Church was a racist organization denying blacks the priesthood. Yet, simply because the LDS Church decides 170 years later to delay the age when certain children are allowed to be baptized, that kicks off the Great Apostasy. I hope you understand why I'm very incredulous about your reasoning here.

Yes, Tobin. I am not at all surprised that you are incredulous. Denying eligible kids baptism is squarely against Christian doctrine and arguably worse than marrying teenagers or denying blacks the priesthood for reasons that would be fairly obvious to anyone with a modicum of Biblical literacy.

[_Tobin]

Yes, Tobin. I am not at all surprised that you are incredulous. Denying eligible kids baptism is squarely against Christian doctrine and arguably worse than marrying teenagers or denying blacks the priesthood for reasons that would be fairly obvious to anyone with a modicum of Biblical literacy.

The LDS Church isn't governed by the Bible. It is governed by its leaders who seem to do as they please and have done so since its founding. I just think it is silly to hang your hat on something so flimsy as this as the start of the Great Apostasy of the LDS Church. It certainly doesn't help clarify why LDS claims were true before this policy was announced and suddenly became false afterwards. After all, I think modern prophets and apostles, the D&C and Book of Mormon should have put to bed any idea the LDS Church was purely governed or interested in doing what others (including you) interpret the Bible to say.

[_Jesse Pinkman]

The only reason I didn't resign is because I plan to become a mole. I'm just waiting for the time I make enough money to drive a nicer looking car so I don't look suspicious.

But if you're going to be a mole, that means that you actually have to start attending Church again. Your feeling of freedom on Sundays will disappear again.

I don't know that it's worth it. I have to be honest here I absolutely LOVE Sundays. I look forward to them now. Growing up, and before my divorce, I HATED Sundays. They completely sucked. Now, Sunday is one of my favorite days of the week. It is so nice to not have to dress up every week, and sit in a service for 3 hours.

I get to sleep in, and then spend a lovely day with my boyfriend since my ex has custody of my son on Sundays. And it's more than just Sundays! I get to drink my coffee in the morning, and my red wine at night completely guilt free.

I still pray. I'm still close to the Lord, and I still study the scriptures...but on MY terms...not as they are dictated by any organization. I don't think that I have ever felt as at peace.

[_mentalgymnast]

If God endowed people with brains, then figuring out the LDS Church is hurtful, false, or what have you, is more than sufficient divine inspiration.

I think there are people who actually believe this.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

There's a difference between an organization that isn't "gay friendly" and one that goes out of its way to divide families and hurt children.

Yes, there are some that are hurting because of this policy. No one is disputing that. The question is, at least for me, whether or not THIS is reason to dispense with the truth claims of the church. One can go through other examples throughout history where people have been either marginalized or hurt because of the actions of ecclesiastical/religious leaders and/or the teachings/practices/doctrines taught by a religious institution...but does that, in and of itself, negate or call into question the core truths/message of the restoration...referencing the LDS Church in particular?

Even if it appears that theologically it is creating some conundrums that don't seem to fit in with those core truths?

Regards,
MG

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Yes, there are some that are hurting because of this policy. No one is disputing that. The question is, at least for me, whether or not THIS is reason to dispense with the truth claims of the church.

Regards,
MG

What, exactly, would be the reason(s) to dispense with the truth claims of the Church?

- Doc