As many here have said, if I am, I’m an awfully poor one, right?
Yep. You are a lousy apologist.
Care to discuss the Book of Abraham afresh? I'll be glad to prove how bad you really are. I don't believe we have ever discussed Anubis's missing nose and headcloth.
I really appreciate the fact you didn't try to double down or walk it back but just admitted that it's human nature and our clicking away on this board sometimes gets us in a little trouble. I mean, just look at me! hahahahah! I've got the biggest mouth here, next to Philo!
Anyway, good job Kish!
Thanks, Shulem. I have learned that you guys have a low-tolerance for BS and a lack of introspection.
"He disturbs the laws of his country, he forces himself upon women, and he puts men to death without trial.” ~Otanes on the monarch, Herodotus Histories 3.80.
That quote certainly answered the question of this thread. I can't say that I don't understand where he's coming from, however. The very first time I ever posted on a Mormon board, which I just happened to stumble upon somehow, was to give a piece of my mind to a critic making fun of baptism for the dead. I was partially active at that time and still considered myself a marginal believer in the church and in God.
Lost Gospel of Thomas 1:8 - And Jesus said, "what about the Pharisees? They did it too! Wherefore, we shall do it even more!"
I do have a problem with a critic being the critic of that which I believe and/or hope to be true in its essence and at its core. The pearl of great price.
That quote certainly answered the question of this thread. I can't say that I don't understand where he's coming from, however. The very first time I ever posted on a Mormon board, which I just happened to stumble upon somehow, was to give a piece of my mind to a critic making fun of baptism for the dead. I was partially active at that time and still considered myself a marginal believer in the church and in God.
I think you are scratching at something very meaningful here that goes deeper than a single quote or a single doctrine.
What you’re describing sounds like trusting a doctrine that can feel satisfying but it asks you to trust the system whose foundation has cracks. Looking back on 9-11 and the rush to Afghanistan and Iraq to exact punishment might serve as a good example of these types of errors. At the time, the general sense was it was morally good to do so (though not without some significant voices of opposition), but eventually proved to be considered an overreach.
Doctrines (and subsequent actions) that “sound pleasing to the ear,” are a very old problem—one identified by Paul, actually, though not restricted to his thinking. Ideas that resolve moral struggle too neatly can actually be misleading or even dangerous. Explaining away suffering and discomfort risks that the “explainer” can mislead you, and may require you to accept unacceptable things about the one who explains. If the prophet is wrong—or merely acting out of human desire to gain followers or other reasons—then the doctrine doesn’t just fail intellectually, it fails morally, because it can result in abandoning your own conscience. And while conscience can be mistaken—questioning it can be healthy—searing it to trust in authority alone is something else entirely.
I think you're mostly right but theological dressing not required. It's defensiveness and tribalism, like, defending a spouse or sibling who has pursued drugs or crime. Even people who are abusive may defend those that they abuse, it's okay if they hit their boy but if somebody else does, they explode more than a normal parent and seek revenge.
Lost Gospel of Thomas 1:8 - And Jesus said, "what about the Pharisees? They did it too! Wherefore, we shall do it even more!"
I think you're mostly right but theological dressing not required. It's defensiveness and tribalism, like, defending a spouse or sibling who has pursued drugs or crime. Even people who are abusive may defend those that they abuse, it's okay if they hit their boy but if somebody else does, they explode more than a normal parent and seek revenge.
That’s fair. I think the overkill from me is seeking to explore the deep roots when it isn’t required.
I’ve been thinking a lot about conscience and Abraham since we started discussing that topic and I haven’t quite let go yet lol
What I mean is I’d like to take an axe to the root. Sometimes that comes out as lengthy overwork because the taproot isn’t clear—it’s like a bunch of smaller roots that don’t crash the entirety and just keep growing back. There might be a parable in there somewhere lol
The good news is I get so much from these discussions for myself personally.
That quote certainly answered the question of this thread. I can't say that I don't understand where he's coming from, however. The very first time I ever posted on a Mormon board, which I just happened to stumble upon somehow, was to give a piece of my mind to a critic making fun of baptism for the dead. I was partially active at that time and still considered myself a marginal believer in the church and in God.
I've got the biggest mouth here, next to Philo!
