Three Questions (Split from, ‘Vogel Responds …’)

[drumdude]

it is necessary at this time to obey this commandment to enter the temple. Critics seem to have a real fixation on tithing.

Critics had a real fixation on blacks not having the priesthood in 1978. Sometimes critics are necessary to get the brethren to grudgingly choose the right.

Past church leaders taught tithing would not be necessary once the church was self sustaining. That day is here. But current prophets are too afraid to take a leap of faith.

[MG 2.0]

Thank you for your civil response, Morley. I appreciate it. Here’s the thing. I think it’s rather hard to pinpoint the ‘one big thing’ or the two or three big things that have been revealed in the last 100 years. Most, if not all, of the primary ‘restoration’ revelation was introduced/given during the first years of the restoration. The scriptures, especially the Doctrine and Covenants contain those revelations.

Priesthood, covenants, etc.

Prophets since the beginning years of the restoration have, as I said, carried the restored keys of the Priesthood from generation to generation. They have fine tuned or tweaked the revelations that came at the earlier point of origin.

Why did I mention hindsight as being the key to seeing revelation? Again, because we can then see how the hand of the Lord led us along to where we (the church) are at today. This is what I went into somewhat detail/depth on earlier, so I won’t here.

So, I appreciate your question. Earlier I used the word ‘fantastical’. Folks can go back and look at the context if they want. My concern is that if we are looking for ‘signs and miracles’ that are fantastical we may find ourselves, on the whole, disappointed. In my opinion the lion’s share of fantastical revelation has previously been given through ancient prophets and also the prophets at the beginning of this dispensation.

At this point we see line upon line, precept upon precept. Here a little, there a little.

I referred to expectations earlier. I invite others to go back and again read what I’ve written in detail. I wasn’t ‘whistling Dixie’.

Your general contractor brother would be hard pressed to exchange places with President Nelson and exercise the keys for church administration and governance that he has been entrusted with.

And again, as a reminder, I have gone into significant detail earlier as to where and what place a prophet fulfills his mandate/calling.

Hope this helps.

Thank you, MG. From what you both say and don't say above, it's apparent that my brother, uncle, and mother-in-law are all as competent at channeling modern revelation as any LDS prophet in the last 100 years. I wonder if your other cornerstones of truth regarding the Restoration are as reliable as this one has turned out to be.

You're absolutely correct in noting that you went into significant detail/depth in your earlier posts. I, too, hope others read what you both have said and have avoided saying in those expositions. Your own line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little there a little, fantastical hindsight explanations should indeed be examined closely. Perhaps you will want to link to the most salient portions of these, for the viewers at home.

I would be VERY interested in what I “didn’t say”.

Care to elaborate a bit? Granted, you’re going to have to put words in my mouth.

And yes, I am happy to have folks go back and read my posts in context. From some of the responses I’ve received it seems apparent that some didn’t.

Second or third time is a charm.

I would be interested in your list of “salient portions” of my posts where you point out what I didn’t say and how it was of greater import than what I did say.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

it is necessary at this time to obey this commandment to enter the temple. Critics seem to have a real fixation on tithing.

Critics had a real fixation on blacks not having the priesthood in 1978. Sometimes critics are necessary to get the brethren to grudgingly choose the right.

Past church leaders taught tithing would not be necessary once the church was self sustaining. That day is here. But current prophets are too afraid to take a leap of faith.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see that time come at some point. Some of the earlier church leaders alluded to that possibility. But I don’t know why you are personally concerned with that. You’re keeping that 10%+ in your pocket as it is.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

Critics had a real fixation on blacks not having the priesthood in 1978. Sometimes critics are necessary to get the brethren to grudgingly choose the right.

Past church leaders taught tithing would not be necessary once the church was self sustaining. That day is here. But current prophets are too afraid to take a leap of faith.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see that time come at some point. Some of the earlier church leaders alluded to that possibility. But I don’t know why you are personally concerned with that. You’re keeping that 10%+ in your pocket as it is.

Regards,
MG

Because the church is still teaching members to blindly pay even if they can’t afford it. They’re telling members that some miracle will happen to fill in the gap. It’s predatory. The church should be teaching that tithing is optional, just like temple attendance is optional.

Especially when they’re also facing a lawsuit for fraud, because Hinkley lied and said no tithing funds would be used for the Citycreek mall.

[Marcus]

One thing I have been finding lately is that very few Mormons online today seem to have a consistent understanding of their own doctrine. There seems to be a general strategy of downplaying differences, which inevitably results in errors in representation of Mormon belief. Maybe it is a very eclectic church now, with members believing whatever they want, as long as the underlying, most basic single requirement is met: Paying tithing to maintain their eligibility to enter their temple.

A far cry from the religious slogan of my youth, 'we are proud to be a peculiar people...'

Along with IHAQ I would challenge you to take a ‘critic’s view’ of the core doctrines list that I’ve posted. To be honest, I rattled this off the top of my head as I wrote/answered the earlier post where I originally made the list. There could be more in the list I suppose…but this was good enough for the point I was attempting to make with drumdude.

I’d be interested in your thoughts in regards to the point I was trying to make, Marcus. There’s a question embedded in there.

I think you might be mistaken in thinking that ‘online Mormons’ don’t seem to have a consistent understanding of our doctrine. I’m just a regular guy and there’s lots of regular guys out there that are members of the church that could rattle off a list very similar to mine without having to give it much thought.

Not quite sure why you would think otherwise.

Really? Because i was responding to this,

You’re wrong on some of these.

Salvation (according to the Church) is granted to everyone regardless of ordinances. It’s what Jesus died for.

All people will be resurrected (according to LDS teachings) without exception.

Faith, Repentance, Baptism, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are NOT necessary for salvation.

Temple Marriage is a requirement for exaltation, in addition to what you listed.

Weren’t you paying attention during Sunday School?

No response to me pointing out some very basic errors in your claims about what the Church teaches MG?

I don’t think I was ‘downplaying differences’. Again, I would ask you to point out the so-called ‘errors’.

And again, i would remind you that i was responding to ihaq's list of your errors:

You’re wrong on some of these.

Salvation (according to the Church) is granted to everyone regardless of ordinances. It’s what Jesus died for.

All people will be resurrected (according to LDS teachings) without exception.

Faith, Repentance, Baptism, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are NOT necessary for salvation.

Temple Marriage is a requirement for exaltation, in addition to what you listed.

Weren’t you paying attention during Sunday School?

No response to me pointing out some very basic errors in your claims about what the Church teaches MG?

I don’t think the church is as eclectic as you might think/hope. There are core doctrines. Without them we would cease to be Christ’s church. That ought to be common sense 101.

I didn’t even mention tithing as being a core doctrine. Although, yes, it is necessary at this time to obey this commandment to enter the temple. Critics seem to have a real fixation on tithing. drumdude expressed the fact that he would just as well not have to make that sacrifice along with keeping the Sabbath Day holy.

Anyway, I look forward to your response, along with IHAQ. It will be interesting to see if you both come up with the same answer.

I'll give you a chance to respond to ihaq's list of your errors first.

[MG 2.0]

I'll give you a chance to respond to ihaq's list of your errors first.

Already did. Page 11. There weren’t any errors. You’re avoiding my questions through deflection.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

I'll give you a chance to respond to ihaq's list of your errors first.

Already did. Page 11. There weren’t any errors. You’re avoiding my questions through deflection.

Regards,
MG

Here’s what you said:

It should be pointed out, however, that the truth claims of the CofJCofLDS remain the same today as they did at the point of origin in the modern era.

1. God lives.
2. Jesus is the Christ and our Savior and Redeemer.
3. Faith, Repentance, Baptism, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are necessary for salvation and exaltation.
4. We will be judged by our faith and works as we accept the grace given by Christ through His Atonement.
5. Ordinances are a necessary part of God’s plan. They are ‘entry points’ along the path that leads towards salvation/exaltation.
6. Prophets receive revelation for our day from the Lord.
7. We are accountable for our own sins.
8. Life is eternal and all mankind, with some exceptions, will be resurrected.

Here, as an example, is what the Church actually teaches about resurrection:

Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people will be resurrected and saved from physical death (see 1 Corinthians 15:22).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng

Because of His Atonement, everyone born on this earth will be resurrected (see 1 Corinthians 15:21–22). Just as Jesus was resurrected, our spirits will be reunited with our bodies, “that they can die no more … , never to be divided” (Alma 11:45). This condition is called immortality. All people who have ever lived will be resurrected, “both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous” (Alma 11:44).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... t?lang=eng

You’ve made numerous errors in your representation of the gospel. I’ve just given you one example. I would recommend you revisit the Gospel Doctrine manual as a starting point, and maybe get the missionaries to teach you as an “investigator”. That way you won’t mislead people as to what the Gospel is/isn’t.

[I Have Questions]

One thing I have been finding lately is that very few Mormons online today seem to have a consistent understanding of their own doctrine. There seems to be a general strategy of downplaying differences, which inevitably results in errors in representation of Mormon belief. Maybe it is a very eclectic church now, with members believing whatever they want, as long as the underlying, most basic single requirement is met: Paying tithing to maintain their eligibility to enter their temple.

A far cry from the religious slogan of my youth, 'we are proud to be a peculiar people...'

The Church is now very careful to not suggest that Mormonism is the only true Church. Something it proudly declared for many years. It wants to play nice and sidle up to religions it once declared as “the whore of all the earth”. The Church is now very much a political institution, rather than a theological one.

[Morley]

Thank you, MG. From what you both say and don't say above, it's apparent that my brother, uncle, and mother-in-law are all as competent at channeling modern revelation as any LDS prophet in the last 100 years. I wonder if your other cornerstones of truth regarding the Restoration are as reliable as this one has turned out to be.

You're absolutely correct in noting that you went into significant detail/depth in your earlier posts. I, too, hope others read what you both have said and have avoided saying in those expositions. Your own line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little there a little, fantastical hindsight explanations should indeed be examined closely. Perhaps you will want to link to the most salient portions of these, for the viewers at home.

I would be VERY interested in what I “didn’t say”.

Care to elaborate a bit? Granted, you’re going to have to put words in my mouth.

And yes, I am happy to have folks go back and read my posts in context. From some of the responses I’ve received it seems apparent that some didn’t.

Second or third time is a charm.

I would be interested in your list of “salient portions” of my posts where you point out what I didn’t say and how it was of greater import than what I did say.

Regards,
MG

Why are you misrepresenting what I said? I didn't write that what you didn't say had greater import than what you did say. The things we leave out, however, always speak just as loudly as what we include. You, for instance, decry the fact that I won't repeat my spiritual history and beliefs, each time we meet.

And no, I don't have a list of what you, in the past, have referred to as your "pearls of wisdom'--those things that you think everyone should go back and read. I did, however, want suggest that you should link to what you believe are your greatest hits, so we could each consume and enjoy.

[MG 2.0]

Already did. Page 11. There weren’t any errors. You’re avoiding my questions through deflection.

Regards,
MG

Here’s what you said:

It should be pointed out, however, that the truth claims of the CofJCofLDS remain the same today as they did at the point of origin in the modern era.

1. God lives.
2. Jesus is the Christ and our Savior and Redeemer.
3. Faith, Repentance, Baptism, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are necessary for salvation and exaltation.
4. We will be judged by our faith and works as we accept the grace given by Christ through His Atonement.
5. Ordinances are a necessary part of God’s plan. They are ‘entry points’ along the path that leads towards salvation/exaltation.
6. Prophets receive revelation for our day from the Lord.
7. We are accountable for our own sins.
8. Life is eternal and all mankind, with some exceptions, will be resurrected.

Here, as an example, is what the Church actually teaches about resurrection:

Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, all people will be resurrected and saved from physical death (see 1 Corinthians 15:22).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng

Because of His Atonement, everyone born on this earth will be resurrected (see 1 Corinthians 15:21–22). Just as Jesus was resurrected, our spirits will be reunited with our bodies, “that they can die no more … , never to be divided” (Alma 11:45). This condition is called immortality. All people who have ever lived will be resurrected, “both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous” (Alma 11:44).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... t?lang=eng

You’ve made numerous errors in your representation of the gospel. I’ve just given you one example. I would recommend you revisit the Gospel Doctrine manual as a starting point, and maybe get the missionaries to teach you as an “investigator”. That way you won’t mislead people as to what the Gospel is/isn’t.

Hi IHAQ, as you are probably aware there has been discussion about those whom are referred to as the sons of perdition. Whether or not they will be resurrected. There have been differing opinions and pronouncements falling into the shade of gray area. President Kimball had his opinions as did John Widstoe and Brigham Young.

As I said earlier, if you would like to start a new thread dealing with what you believe to be doctrinal errors I made in my list, feel free to do so. As it is, I stand by my list. More importantly for the sake of the discussion I was having with drumdude (and invited you and Marcus to participate) my point still stands. Methinks that both of you were attempting to circumnavigate around it.

I find it interesting that when I’m having a discussion and bring up so salient points for discussion that some folks will throw in a grenade to blow up the discussion.

Anyway, I see what you were attempting to do.

I invite those that are dropping in to read this thread that you might consider going back and reading the thread from the beginning. This thread, like others, has been disrupted and sidetracked by a few folks.

I found the discussion with drumdude to be useful and enlightening.

Thanks again to those that added to the discussion. Morley and canpakes I appreciated what you brought into the discussion also.

We’ll see if there is anything else that comes of it at this point besides grenades.

Regards,
MG