sock puppet wrote: I [spent] most of my youth reading about Jesus, living by Mormon precepts of what the LDS claimed Jesus wanted, etc. So, you know, that's how I know of these characteristics. Belief has nothing to do with knowing.
How did you get through 3 Nephi 8 and 9 without seeing that Jesus can be a hard **s at times when the situation requires it.
Tough love. Knowing the end from the beginning.
It's interesting that when the 'gentle Jesus' fits in with what might be considered to be a false narrative then unbelievers will sing praise to Him as though He actually existed. But the rest of the time they go around...in essence...calling Him a mean SOB. You know, the psychotic god of the Old Testament kind of thing.
You need to make up your mind.
Regards, MG
He's your god, not mine. It's you adherents that need to figure out how to make him consistent, and not bi-polar.
Kishkumen wrote:I never said that all LDS doctrine and practice is in the Bible. I said that it was pertinent and had bearing on LDS doctrine. You want it both ways. But, Jesus' teaching has long been interpreted in LDS circles as applying to the baptism of children of accountable age. The point is that LDS doctrine, established by modern revelation, and supported by Christ's own words, sets the age of eligibility for baptism for all children at 8.
Are these the same Mormons that interpreted the Bible to support polygamy and racism?
Kishkumen wrote:There are no exceptions.
Sure there are. I've provided lots of examples. And is this the same "no exceptions" clause that pertains to having to live polygamy and that blacks can't have the priesthood.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:Sure there are. I've provided lots of examples. And is this the same "no exceptions" clause that pertains to having to live polygamy and that blacks can't have the priesthood.
I see no exception to the eligibility for baptism at 8 in modern revelation. The laws of the current dispensation apply. There are no "just because Tobin says so" clauses.
In any case, thanks for the diversion, Tobin. As usual, it went nowhere.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
mentalgymnast wrote:How did you get through 3 Nephi 8 and 9 without seeing that Jesus can be a hard **s at times when the situation requires it.
Tough love. Knowing the end from the beginning.
It's interesting that when the 'gentle Jesus' fits in with what might be considered to be a false narrative then unbelievers will sing praise to Him as though He actually existed. But the rest of the time they go around...in essence...calling Him a mean SOB. You know, the psychotic god of the Old Testament kind of thing.
You need to make up your mind.
Regards, MG
Yeah. Go figure. When God is depicted acting like a psycho mass murderer, he's much less popular. When he's nice to the children he's much better loved. I don't suppose that's a reflection of the humanity of those making these judgments. What do you think?
You, on the other hand, are praising tough love destroyer Jesus and poking fun at the fact that decent people prefer a compassionate God.
You really know how to win people over to your faith.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Tobin wrote:Sure there are. I've provided lots of examples. And is this the same "no exceptions" clause that pertains to having to live polygamy and that blacks can't have the priesthood.
I see no exception to the eligibility for baptism at 8 in modern revelation. The laws of the current dispensation apply. There are no "just because Tobin says so" clauses.
It is probably with the same revelations about discontinuing polygamy and that blacks can have the priesthood. The point being that since the LDS leaders are prophets, seers and revelators - what they say including this policy - goes. As far as the LDS Church is concerned, it is revelation.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:It is probably with the same revelations about discontinuing polygamy and that blacks can have the priesthood. The point being that since the LDS leaders are prophets, seers and revelators - what they say including this policy - goes. As far as the LDS Church is concerned, it is revelation.
Policies are subject to assessment by the standard of the scriptures. Punkt.
Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Nov 26, 2015 3:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Kishkumen wrote:Policies are subject to assessment by the standard of the scriptures. Punkt.
And as I've already pointed out, there are plenty of scriptures supporting exceptions about when you are able to be baptized. If the LDS leadership decides to change course (which they've done lots of times in the past on more pugnacious subjects), there is certainly plenty of precedent for it.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:And as I've already pointed out, there are plenty of scriptures supporting exceptions about when you are able to be baptized. If the LDS leadership decides to change course (which they've done lots of times in the past on more pugnacious subjects), there is certainly plenty of precedent for it.
If you stretch hard enough, you can justify damn near anything, and if that is the kind of society you prefer, you are welcome to it. The argument supporting this policy is non-existent. Maybe you should offer your services as the man who has seen God. Clearly they need help. Although I have yet to see what the point of your experience was, other than to turn you into a tireless troll.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
If we take the examples of polygamy and racism, there are explicit explanations in the scriptures regarding the deity's rationale for employing these tools (as repugnant as they are). I have yet to see any scripture that declares anything different about the age of eligibility for baptism. Where is God's explanation for why he might suddenly choose to deny the children of gay marrieds baptism until 18?
There is none. The decision was based on legal CYA, not revelation.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Jesse Pinkman wrote:Tobin doesn't pay attention or comprehend much of what anyone actually writes, Kish. That's why I have him on ignore. I suggest you do the same.
[MODERATOR NOTE: Please think really hard about that admonition. Do you truly think that enouraging participants to ignore each other aligns with the spirit upon which the board was founded?]
Ignore is a feature of the board that has been available for members since its inception. With all due respect, Shades, if you have a problem with members using and discussing a feature of the board that is readily available to all, then maybe the Ignore feature should be eliminated.
So you're chasing around a fly and in your world, I'm the idiot?
"Friends don't let friends be Mormon." Sock Puppet, MDB.
Music is my drug of choice.
"And that is precisely why none of us apologize for holding it to the celestial standard it pretends that it possesses." Kerry, MDB _________________
