Question for Mo Experts

[dastardly stem]

Whatever, MG. God endorses scripture saying he’ll freely answer questions. After things go screwy for the church and after it teaches racist things for a hundred and something years suddenly it’s explained god is under no obligation to answer questions at all. Sounds all very wondrous and divine to me.

[MG 2.0]

Please point out where what you said below refers to either God's obligation or his lack there of.

You know the history behind the priesthood ban on those of African decent. It’s not as simple as you portray it. Or DO you know the history? And the people/culture that influenced the views of those that said what they said.

What do the current views that are held…including the “we don’t know” comments…tell you? They may tell you something different than what others hear/interpret. This would be due to competing influences, knowledge, and experiences that you have had vs. what others have had.

That’s the rub. And that’s where disagreements lie.

In specificity it doesn’t. What I’m saying is that as we learn the history behind the priesthood ban (at least that which we DO know) it’s not a simple thing to say “God has an obligation to tell us what this is all about.”

He doesn’t. As I said:

Due to competing influences, knowledge, and experiences that you have had vs. what others have had.

In other words, I’ve seen/heard the same stuff, more or less, that you have. I am not of the same opinion that you are in thinking that God is under obligation to give all answers to all questions.

You think differently, if I’m reading you right.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

So, apparently all we need to do is to ask god - who knew?

Quoting scripture does not imply agreement with said scripture. Sometimes it is done to point out inconsistencies, or attempts by believers to dodge and weave.

I don’t see it as a dodge and weave. I see it as a logical way of reading scripture and applying a certain exegesis to reading it.

You are also a strict literalist in this instance? But not in the whole?

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

He doesn’t.

Your opinion or Church doctrine?

[MG 2.0]

Whatever, MG. God endorses scripture saying he’ll freely answer questions.

Not quite sure what you mean. What I am reading you to say that you are a strict/fundamentalist in something that you don’t even believe in.

That’s an interesting position to take.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

Could someone here with legal training please write a suitable disclaimer that covers god in the event that he decides not to fulfill his scriptural promises.

It should be sufficiently extensive and comprehensive that it can be used in cases where faith does not move mountains, prayers of the faithful do not heal the sick, etc.

[MG 2.0]

He doesn’t.

Your opinion or Church doctrine?

You tell me. Back it up. And don’t do the Marcus thing and put words in my mouth.

You are under obligation to demonstrate that God must reveal ALL rather than line upon line, precept upon precept.

Regards,
MG

[dastardly stem]

Whatever, MG. God endorses scripture saying he’ll freely answer questions.

Not quite sure what you mean. What I am reading you to say that you are a strict/fundamentalist in something that you don’t even believe in.

That’s an interesting position to take.

Regards,
MG

Lol. All I did was point out a scripture that says god will answer questions freely. It’s the same scripture god endorsed and inspired Joseph with, apparently. But, as it turns out the wonderful passage in which it says god will answer questions freely, without all the caveats you wish were included, was wrong all along. You have to assume the passage means god will not answer questions, if he decides not to. And anyone who thinks the passage says god will answer questions is just a fundamentalist and therefore is wrong.

Or something. I mean maybe you’re onto something, MG. Can you get the church to endorse this funny teaching you’re espousing?

[MG 2.0]

Could someone here with legal training please write a suitable disclaimer that covers god in the event that he decides not to fulfill his scriptural promises.

It should be sufficiently extensive and comprehensive that it can be used in cases where faith does not move mountains, prayers of the faithful do not heal the sick, etc.

Does this help:

For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have” (2 Nephi 28:30)

Have you received? Or did you have all you could take?

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

I'm imagining god on Reddit, conducting an AMA.

redditor1: asks a question

god: well, I'm not going to tell you that!

redditor2: asks a question

god: I'm not going to answer that either!

redditor3: you realize that "ask me anything" means what it says, right? You said that you would give answers liberally to anyone who asked.

god: well, I also said somewhere else that I would give only dribs and drabs of information!