mentalgymnast wrote:I think we need to look at everything contextually.
When I was growing up LDS, this notion was called situational ethics and roundly condemned by every LDS leader. Are you saying the current crop of Brethren now embrace situational ethics?
I have a question wrote:If Oaks believes what he says, why take Priesthood Power away as per the OP article? Was he lying MG, or do you think he’s wrong and you are right? Can you explain why he thinks “otherwise”?
I think the safety of the missionaries is of primary concern to the church and to the families that sent their sons and daughters out into the world.
Pure and simple.
Regards, MG
So the safety of missionaries, and the health of plague victims, is best served by not relying on the healing power of the priesthood at all. Got that, but it isn’t what I asked.
Do you believe, like Oaks, that the Priesthood (or even just prayer) can physically heal people absent of any other attention?
And if you do, why remove that healing power from people at the point they need it the most?
The reality is that Oaks has not the courage of his conviction. At the point his bluff was called, he folded.
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')
mentalgymnast wrote:I think we need to look at everything contextually.
When I was growing up LDS, this notion was called situational ethics and roundly condemned by every LDS leader. Are you saying the current crop of Brethren now embrace situational ethics?
My thinking is that God may embrace situational ethics. The evidence throughout history...if one chooses to believe in a creator/God...shows that God is not always stepping in to save the day in each and every situation that arises. Although it may well be that at certain times He has been pulling the strings in an indirect way in order that His purposes might be fulfilled.
When there is a country that is undergoing mass plague and/or other conditions (tsunamis, earthquakes,etc.) that are impacting many people I don't think you're going to see any mass healings, miraculous interventions, or the like. Priesthood power is used to increase faith and comes in response to the exercise of faith. Macro application of priesthood power rather than micro application would defeat that purpose, in my opinion.
I have a question wrote:Do you believe, like Oaks, that the Priesthood (or even just prayer) can physically heal people absent of any other attention?
I believe that Priesthood power can heal the sick and afflicted.
I have a question wrote:And if you do, why remove that healing power from people at the point they need it the most?
As I've mentioned, situational ethics. by the way, the healing power is still there and resides in the Priesthood holders native to that area. It is the missionaries' Priesthood power that is/was being temporarily withdrawn.
Can anyone point to a definitive documented instance where a priesthood blessing worked in a way where the outcome can not as well be attributed to hapstance? Why are no limbs being regenerated? Why do members persist in going to the Dr. when a blessing is so much cheaper than modern health care? With all the numbers being crunched by insurance actuaries, why does being Mormon in Utah not save you money on your insurance rate? If said priesthood power can not be distinguished as statistically significant, is there any power?
The inconsistencies are staggering, in this anyway you play it god wins game.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.
Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality. ~Bill Hamblin
I have a question wrote:Do you believe, like Oaks, that the Priesthood (or even just prayer) can physically heal people absent of any other attention?
I believe that Priesthood power can heal the sick and afflicted.
I have a question wrote:And if you do, why remove that healing power from people at the point they need it the most?
As I've mentioned, situational ethics. by the way, the healing power is still there and resides in the Priesthood holders native to that area. It is the missionaries' Priesthood power that is/was being temporarily withdrawn.
Regards, MG
Riiiiiiiiight. Oh the priesthood is still there, and God is working miracles, even though the plague will kill many......... yep......... your priesthood imagination is pure fabrication. These kinds of events prove it. The actual LACK of evidence for it is evidence against the priesthood, but I honestly don't expect you to grasp such a simple point.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
mentalgymnast wrote:As I've mentioned, situational ethics. by the way, the healing power is still there and resides in the Priesthood holders native to that area. It is the missionaries' Priesthood power that is/was being temporarily withdrawn.
Philo Sofee wrote:Riiiiiiiiight. Oh the priesthood is still there, and God is working miracles, even though the plague will kill many......... yep......... your priesthood imagination is pure fabrication. These kinds of events prove it. The actual LACK of evidence for it is evidence against the priesthood, but I honestly don't expect you to grasp such a simple point.
Granted, if the Priesthood was/is being used/exercised we won't see any evidence of that in media outlets. It would be something that would be passed on word of mouth among the believers as a demonstration of the doctrine(?) that faith precedes the miracle.
If indeed, faith precedes the miracle, we would see priesthood healings occur in situations that are isolated and rather spread out rather than the whole country being miraculously healed of the plague.
It would be something that would be passed on word of mouth among the believers as a demonstration of the doctrine(?) that faith precedes the miracle.