tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post5537915839159419564..comments2023-11-02T07:25:45.884-05:00Comments on Mormanity - a blog for those interested in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: A Different Jesus? Really? And Just When Do Saved Christians Lose Their Souls?Jeff Lindsayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comBlogger114125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-377863417867620992011-03-26T12:14:43.769-05:002011-03-26T12:14:43.769-05:00“disingenuous” (meaning insincere?) Not sure what...“disingenuous” (meaning insincere?) Not sure what is meant by claiming this.<br /><br />Your assessment of jackg’s insincerity is grounded only on the basis that he is not a practicing Mormon. Ergo you are implying that only practicing Mormon’s are allowed to compare/contrast Mormonism.<br /><br />The validity and effectiveness of his comments are not in dispute. By stating the comments are meant to appeal to the emotions, you essentially admitting that he has made good points to which you have not be able to formulate a response. Without engaging jackg in further dialogue, you have no basis for determining if he does not really believe the item he is presenting makes Mormon interpretation of Christianity different from Evangelical, other than fact he is not a practicing Mormon.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-37322037991946900772011-02-27T13:12:13.019-06:002011-02-27T13:12:13.019-06:00Mormography,
What exactly in my post implies that...Mormography,<br /><br />What exactly in my post implies that only a Mormon can compare/contrast Mormonism with other churches? My post was intended to point out jackg's disingenuous comments. You'll find I'm always apt for a real open discussionLamdaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10550528525997628134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-38027703888021320612011-02-27T04:01:16.763-06:002011-02-27T04:01:16.763-06:00Lamdaddy,
You just admitted that the “ugly smear”...Lamdaddy,<br /><br />You just admitted that the “ugly smear” comment was not justly based on jackg alone, but other conversations independent of jackg. You have essentially argued that jackg (apparently an ex-Mormon) must be one of these evangelicals with whom you have had previous conversations. The essence of your statement is that only practicing Mormon's are allowed to compare and contrast Mormonism with another religion (a common theme of Mormanity and his cronies) and only practicing Mormons are allowed to pointed out that Mormons have a distinct believe set from other mainstream protestants. In other words, like Mormanity, you have proven are not interested in genuine dialogue.Mormographyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00876509006690501141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-90145340201854206312011-01-23T23:46:28.990-06:002011-01-23T23:46:28.990-06:00Let us not mince words. The doctrine that Jesus a...Let us not mince words. The doctrine that Jesus and Satan are brothers (as all children of God would be) ALWAYS comes up in these kinds of discussions with any evangelical I have ever met. That tells me that this is used to appeal to a congregation's emotions and is used to convince people of the "proof" that Mormons worship a false or a "different" Jesus, and is "proof" that Mormons are not Christians. This indeed is an ugly smear. Not because it is our doctrine, but because of how you choose to interpret, present, and use it.<br /><br />It's a silly thing really, since many of our beliefs can be considered extra-biblical. And we have no problem with that.Lamdaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10550528525997628134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-90038630417803457772011-01-23T23:35:24.708-06:002011-01-23T23:35:24.708-06:00Ooops, did I just take the bait again?Ooops, did I just take the bait again?Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-53688135492339873602011-01-23T23:34:18.880-06:002011-01-23T23:34:18.880-06:00Mormography said, "Mormanity claims to believ...Mormography said, "<i>Mormanity claims to believe in a God of truth and justice. This means he</i> [understood to be me, of course]<i> either lacks self discipline or does not truly believe he will held accountable for his double standards, contradictions, strawmen, and hypocrisy.</i>"<br /><br />I vote for lack of self-discipline.Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-3984461825614907542011-01-23T20:27:44.529-06:002011-01-23T20:27:44.529-06:00Mormography said ...
I applaud Mormanity’s effort...Mormography said ...<br /><br />I applaud Mormanity’s efforts in pointing out the contradictions in the Pastor's own logical universe. Here are just a few examples of how I have done the same to Mormanity:<br /><br />- Mormanity’s interpretation of biblical-false-prophet-passages makes it impossible to declare David Koresh or James Strange a false prophet. Simple statement of this fact causes Mormanity to close off any discussion and attack the other person has hostile.<br />- When one points out that the fact that the Small Plates solution to the Lost 116 pages does nothing to prevent conspirators, he goes on the personal attack.<br />- Contrary to his claim that there is nothing wrong with prophets being fallible, he goes to great lengths to change the definition of the word suppress and insist that Hinckley handled the Stowell Forgery completely on the up and up.<br />- When jackg points out doctrine distinct to Mormonism, Mormanity characterizes it has a ugly smear.<br /><br />The list could go on, but the fact would remain the same. Mormanity and his logical universe are no better than the Pastor’s. Of course the Pastor's views on Mormonism are no more hostile than Mormonism views are everyone else. The Pastor is just more honest about his views. In the case of Mormanity, we have here on this blog an abundance of evidence that he resorts to double standards, contradictions, strawmen, and now with this entry hypocrisy. Despite claiming to be a believer, Mormanity's behavior consistently shows he does not belief that he will have to account for his double standards, contradictions, and strawmen. Now with this post he is trying to get that beam out of the Pastor’s eye while he still has one in his.<br /><br />Contrary to Mormon thought, it has been proven that complex systems (such as humans) cannot make definitive statements about themselves (due to inevitable self referential recursion). So a human may claim to believe this or that, but not even the person them self can know whether or not they truly believe in the item they profess belief in. Mormanity claims to believe in a God of truth and justice. This means he either lacks self discipline or does not truly believe he will held accountable for his double standards, contradictions, strawmen, and hypocrisy. Evidence suggests that he has an abundance of self discipline, ergo despite his claims, he must not believe in a God of truth and justice.<br /><br />Mormanity is welcome to his opinions which he has endlessly expressed on this blog and has claimed is for discussion, not attack. I don't read most of what he posts for the most part because it's clear he is not interested in understanding, learning, or genuine dialog. He has made his complaints and his boasts - dozens of times. I grow weary. There are times when people really aren't interested in understanding or genuine discourse, and their repeated assertions and accusations become a waste of time and bandwidth. I appreciate everyone’s willingness to engage Mormanity, and hope you can have meaningful dialog with him, but I am bothered by his tactics, his condescending tone and his unwillingness to listen and consider.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-69107132821371918972011-01-07T23:43:59.129-06:002011-01-07T23:43:59.129-06:00Jackg,
I also noticed that you are simply dodging...Jackg,<br /><br />I also noticed that you are simply dodging around what Jeff said. You said that Jeff doesn't listen to the New Testament passages that you quoted to him, but he has an entire website dedicated to responding to your interpretation of some of Paul's writings. You didn't address the scriptures that he mentioned, however. <br />The really interesting thing that I always notice from those who share your viewpoints on salvation sound so very much different than the way Jesus taught it. He never taught "eternal security," at least not the way you talk about it. He never spoke of "accepting me into your heart and you're forever saved." No, He told us to follow Him and keep His commandments and warned us about the consequence of sin. He lived and died for us, doing what we couldn't do. I say that accepting Jesus into your heart through a prayer is a work and a condition for salvation. It just doesn't stop there. <br /><br />As for Jesus and Satan being brothers, here's a thought: nowhere in the Bible does it teach otherwise, so a logical person can't call it impossible. God is bigger than any book (including the Bible, which book I read and love), and I don't believe you or I understand everything there is to know about God. The difference is I am open to receive more information about Him and from Him. And while this teaching may be extra-Biblical, it doesn't conflict <br />with the Bible since nowhere does the Bible state that Jesus and Satan AREN'T brothers. <br />It's a funny beef to have, in my opinion.Lamdaddyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10550528525997628134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-41388964313424118022011-01-04T10:27:17.202-06:002011-01-04T10:27:17.202-06:00Everyone might appreciate (or have a coronary, dep...Everyone might appreciate (or have a coronary, depending on your perspective) the following post: <br /><br />"The Power of Jesus As Brother" <br /><br />http://thingsofmysoul.blogspot.com/2010/06/power-of-jesus-as-brother.htmlPapa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-55876470717885848152011-01-03T22:26:30.081-06:002011-01-03T22:26:30.081-06:00Whoa there, jeffg. You're preaching "eter...Whoa there, jeffg. You're preaching "eternal security" while claiming that salvation can be lost by not subscribing to "correct" theology? (For "correct" read "evangelical".) Seems we've gotten back to a major question in Jeff's original post that keeps getting ignored or dodged.FelixAndAvahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16599205574241388362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-46338673841018143392011-01-03T22:22:36.838-06:002011-01-03T22:22:36.838-06:00Jeff,
You said: "JackG, as you surely must k...Jeff,<br /><br />You said: "JackG, as you surely must know, we believe that angels, fallen or otherwise, are part of the vast family of sons and daughters of God, so we're all brothers and sisters."<br /><br />Sorry, but this is absolutley heretical teaching, something a false prophet would preach. <br /><br />As for the "smear" about Jesus and Satan being brothers...does the Church no longer teach this? Something can't be a smear unless it's not true. <br /><br />I'm sorry you don't believe in eternal security, Jeff. The reason you don't is because you think it's all about works. It doesn't matter what New Testament passages one points out to you. So, what can one do? Pray for you. I'll still bring you the truth, but I know you'll reject it. I still think you're a great guy with a great deal of intelligence; I just believe that you have been misled regarding your beliefs about God.<br /><br />Blessings...jackgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-91643232990257741942011-01-02T20:58:21.593-06:002011-01-02T20:58:21.593-06:00Jim and FelixandAva,
Sorry it has taken me a whil...Jim and FelixandAva,<br /><br />Sorry it has taken me a while to come back to this post and respond. Here are the passages from the Book of Mormon that show Christ's visit was nearly 1 year after the destruction.<br /><br />3 Nephi 8:5 And it came to pass in the thirty and fourth year, in the first month, on the fourth day of the month, there arose a great storm, such an one as never had been known in all the land.<br /><br />3 Nephi 10:18 And it came to pass that in the ending of the thirty and fourth year, behold, I will show unto you that the people of Nephi who were spared, and also those who had been called Lamanites, who had been spared, did have great favors shown unto them, and great blessings poured out upon their heads, insomuch that soon after the ascension of Christ into heaven he did truly manifest himself unto them—<br /><br />So the destruction stared on the 4th day of the 34th year and the visit of Christ happened in the ending of the 34th year. Not sure if this would have helped at all with the subsequent discussion, but I wanted to make sure I clarified my point.Dave Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-58060201105822768282011-01-02T18:09:19.123-06:002011-01-02T18:09:19.123-06:00Pops, great closing comments there.
I'm amaze...Pops, great closing comments there.<br /><br />I'm amazed at how easily one can take or create a doctrinal differences and then ascribe that difference to someone worshiping a different Jesus and thus not being a Christian. Jack tells us that "Jesus died that we might live. End of story." Sure--and since we believe in Jesus and worship Him as our savior, you'd think we'd have a lot in common. But in the same comment, Jack turns to the ugly smear about how we believe Christ and Satan are brothers, so why should we wonder that people say we are non-Christian? I hope you aren't arguing that having allegedly incorrect interpretations of scriptures or confused doctrines makes someone non-Christian if they sincerely believe in Jesus Christ.<br /><br />JackG, as you surely must know, we believe that angels, fallen or otherwise, are part of the vast family of sons and daughters of God, so we're all brothers and sisters. Even very evil beings such as Hitler, Herod, and Judas are among the sons of God who were born on earth--as was Christ. The concept that all of us, good and rebellious angels included, are among the children of God is quite compatible with the Bible and with early Christianity. See <a href="http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Relationships.shtml#brothers" rel="nofollow">http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Relationships.shtml#brothers</a>.<br /><br />Jack believes in the doctrine of eternal security and instant salvation and we think we must endure to the end to be saved. So we're worshiping a different Jesus? Would that be the Jesus who said "he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved" (Matt. 24:13)? Would it be the one who gave us the Parable of the Sower to remind us that we need to continually nurture our faith and not let it die or be choked by weeds? Would it be the one who said, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments"? (Matt 19). Or is it the one who speaks in Revelation about the need to overcome to inherit heaven? (E.g., "He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son" in Rev. 21:7).Jeff Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776493593387402607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-7298308768920813552010-12-24T10:25:01.698-06:002010-12-24T10:25:01.698-06:00Just to be able to say I wrote comment #100 (*grin...Just to be able to say I wrote comment #100 (*grin*): <br /><br />Jeff, I think we have strayed far from the point of your excellent post. Sorry for the part I played in that, but I've tried to bring it back to point a number of times. <br /><br />Thanks for writing such a thoughtful post.Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-26200948609233532512010-12-24T07:36:47.214-06:002010-12-24T07:36:47.214-06:00...the anger of the Lord is kindled, and his sword......the anger of the Lord is kindled, and his sword is bathed in heaven, and it shall fall upon the inhabitants of the earth.<br /><br /> And the arm of the Lord shall be revealed; and the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people;<br /><br /> For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant;<br /><br /> They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall.<br /><br /> Wherefore, I the Lord, knowing the calamity which should come upon the inhabitants of the earth, called upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and spake unto him from heaven, and gave him commandments...Popsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-56226481531452997012010-12-24T07:33:20.201-06:002010-12-24T07:33:20.201-06:00The scriptures - and our lives - are sprinkled wit...The scriptures - and our lives - are sprinkled with cues about the nature and personality of God. Some of the cues are subtle, others not so much. From those cues we each construct a model or image of God in our minds. That's a natural human instinct.<br /><br />In that endeavor of creating in our minds an image of God, we sometimes too quickly arrive at a conclusion that disagrees with some of the cues, and then disregard or disbelieve the conflicting evidence.<br /><br />One of the cues that causes confusion is that God apparently allows a great deal of suffering to exist in the world. Even more so, sometimes God himself is the perpetrator of great calamities on the human race. How is that to be reconciled with a God who is supposed to be loving?<br /><br />An accurate perception of the character of God must, by definition, agree with the evidence. If your God of fluffiness and light requires you to ignore cues, or if it suspiciously aligns with the lifestyle to which you are naturally inclined, you might wish to take another look to see if perhaps your God is the a kin of the Gods of stone and wood of the Old Testament, Gods who cannot save.<br /><br />Does God destroy human beings? The evidence clearly says yes. But the evidence also suggests that he gives ample warning to those in peril prior to removing them. Unfortunately in many cases, they are slow to hear because they are so enamored of the God of their own making that they cannot hear the true and living God.<br /><br />One of the wooden idols constructed by modern orthodoxy is the God who cannot or will not any longer intervene in the affairs of men, who will not warn of impending calamity. That is not the God of the Bible.Popsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-25100532560328380452010-12-22T17:59:36.358-06:002010-12-22T17:59:36.358-06:00Papa D,
It's okay that you're done. We&#...Papa D,<br /><br />It's okay that you're done. We're praying for the same thing. You see, there's a real peace that comes from knowing that all you need is Jesus Christ and not the burdensome requirements imposed by JS. Read Colossians, and you will find that Paul is speaking about such men as JS and the false teachings they bring into the world. Despite your attempt to make my praying for you something that isn't quite right, I am still praying for you and your family. The things you believe are leading you away from a true relationship with Jesus Christ because your perception of Him is based on information that is nonBiblical. He was never a man, PD. He has always been God. Why is that so hard for you and other Mormons to believe. There was never a time when He was not God. The Holy Spirit will bear witness to you of this, PD.<br /><br />Blessings...jackgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-28835489983515228312010-12-22T12:43:44.203-06:002010-12-22T12:43:44.203-06:00Wow, Jack, I am done. That's an amazing mis-c...Wow, Jack, I am done. That's an amazing mis-characterization of Jeff's post and the questions that have been asked about it. <br /><br />Praying for you, also - but not in the same way I'm sure you're praying for me. I think you're praying that I see things the way you do and get off my current path to Hell. I'm just praying for you to continue to find peace and joy and God's grace. <br /><br />I really don't mean to be snarky in saying this, but I think that difference is kind of what Jeff was referencing in his post. <br /><br />Anyway, I really am done now.Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-88238215399978405242010-12-22T12:22:52.821-06:002010-12-22T12:22:52.821-06:00I love how you guys support each other. But, supp...I love how you guys support each other. But, supporting each other doesn't make your position any more valid. The issue in this thread isn't what experiences you had with some protestant pastor or pastors; it's not about where you went to school; it's not about whether or not you think my arguments are "juvenile and weak"; rather, it's about what one believes about Jesus Christ. Where does one learn the truth about Jesus Christ? Well, God, in His power, wisdom, and ability to give us what we need, gave us His word in what the world knows as the Bible. Does the Bible teach that Jesus and Satan are brothers? No. Jesus, the creator of ALL, created everything we know about and those things which we are yet to discover. He created the angels, and Lucifer was an angel--he was not ever a human being. So, to believe that Jesus and Satan are brothers is rather vulgar. But, that's what you want to believe, and then you wonder why followers of Jesus Christ reject you as Christians. <br /><br />Jeff's title to this thread reveals a lack of knowledge regarding eternal security, and the power of Jesus Christ to save us NOW. We don't have to wonder whether or not we're saved because we are justified by our faith. I know such a term has no real meaning to Mormons. We are saved on the merits of what Jesus Christ did for us. We are righteous because of His righteousness that is imputed to us. We don't have a righteousness. While we were still enemies to God, God Himself in the form of a man we call Jesus Christ died for us.<br /><br />Your message is one of stress and insecurity because you base the end result of living in the presence of God on what we do as humans. That is not the message Jesus died for. <br /><br />How much of an apologist does one need to be to deliver the simple message of the Good News? A child can preach the gospel, which is this: Jesus died that we might live. End of story. Everything else that JS et al has added to the story is nothing but lies, and has changed the character of Jesus Christ. You can spread the false message of JS all you want, but I am going to spread the truth message that is indeed Good News. Lose JS and gain the true Jesus Christ.<br /><br />Praying for all of you...jacknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-37787612000901878372010-12-21T09:39:10.285-06:002010-12-21T09:39:10.285-06:00or we can quit attributing calamities to God and v...or we can quit attributing calamities to God and view our scriptures not as literal accoutns of God's interaction wtih mortals but rather as a good example of on-going revelation and the evolution of humanity's understanding of God. <br /><br />If our own Articles of Faith include the concept of "as far as it is translated correctly" - why do we need to believe God actually caused the destruction about which we are talking? Why can't we believe that's just what those people thought, even some who were prophets in their time? We say God speaks to us in our own language and according to our own understanding - so if our understanding is limited, why would our expalnations of thse things that happen around us be perfect? <br /><br />Frankly, maybe those things happened and maybe they didn't - but why do we have to assume they happened exactly as recorded and were caused by God's active involvement? <br /><br />Getting back to the point of this post, why would believing a Mormon version about things like this cause someone who once believed a Protestant version to be damned? <br /><br />If we can't get back to the point of the post, I'm done - since I really don't want to get into a Mormon vs. ex-Mormon spitting contest. Nothing is ever accomplished excpet getting wet in a disgusting manner - and I have no use for that at this point in my life.Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-52900555960132372102010-12-21T01:49:34.302-06:002010-12-21T01:49:34.302-06:00All I was asking for was consistency, which was ap...All I was asking for was consistency, which was apparently a little bit TOO much to ask. :)<br /><br />While God's actions sometimes seem cruel to us mortals, we don't have anywhere near the knowledge and perspective He does. It's kind of like taking your child or pet for medical attention. Unpleasant things get done to the patient for reasons he/she does not have the capacity to understand, but which serve a beneficial purpose overall.FelixAndAvahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16599205574241388362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-24942026874462290902010-12-21T01:39:13.107-06:002010-12-21T01:39:13.107-06:00Wow. This is a pretty lively thread.
Felix,
Was ...Wow. This is a pretty lively thread. <br /><br />Felix,<br />Was your question answered? (do you consider the God depicted in the Old Testament "cruel" or "thuggish", or do you consider global holocaust with eight survivors just fine while ranting about much less serious destruction among people established as being hard-hearted and evil (among other offenses, murdering prophets for speaking God's word)?<br /><br />I wondered how you wouldve responded if someone conceded that the portrayal of God in those examples is definitely "cruel".openmindedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15643838710822981863noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-82211923835424458742010-12-20T23:41:54.826-06:002010-12-20T23:41:54.826-06:00First-hand experience with how frantically pastors...First-hand experience with how frantically pastors of Protestant churches rush to smear any denomination other than the one that writes their paychecks trumps anonymous wishful thinking any day, TYVM.<br /><br />Yes, I've read Paul's writings, along with the rest of the Bible repeatedly. Remember, two of every four years of adult Sunday School classes are devoted to the Bible, plus personal study (strongly urged by our leaders, BTW. You'd think if they had anything to worry about from the Bible, they might not emphasize it quite so much). Speaking of the Bible, which version am I supposed to be considering authoritative anyway? KJV? Catholic version with additional books? Revised (which systematically cuts out a lot of references to miracles and other supernatural events, references to Christ's Divinity and role as Savior, etc.)? Some version that emasculates our Heavenly Father and our Savior by denying Them gender?<br /><br />As for my own research, remember that I started off with Ed Decker's efforts to get revenge on a church that expected him to be a faithful husband and didn't fawn over him enough to suit him (his efforts, BTW, have included causing the murders of LDS missionaries by knowingly lying to audiences in Central America about them being CIA agents). Then I branched out, including letting the Church speak for itself instead of relying on second-hand (or worse) fictions. This is how I became LDS, remember.<br /><br />I have no problem with changes to doctrine, Church organization, etc., since I do believe the doctrine of continuing revelation to meet changing needs, knowledge, etc., of Church members. Yes, there have been less-than-perfect Church members. That doesn't make the Church itself false, just means that some of the members have (gasp) human flaws just like any other group of mortal humans.FelixAndAvahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16599205574241388362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-26155982979076266852010-12-20T23:09:11.421-06:002010-12-20T23:09:11.421-06:00"wallowing in the hate you've been taught..."wallowing in the hate you've been taught by those whose livelihood depends on keeping you from finding out for yourself the truth of the Restored Gospel."<br />I was taught at BYU, No hate taught to me there, just the simple truths about how the Church is not the same today as it was in JS's time. Because the Church has been so active at hiding its history, and changing books to erase away things that are controversial, I was able to find out the truth about Mormonism. I credit some great Profs at BYU for teaching me out of Mormonism. My life started when I walked out of the Marriott center with my cap and gown in hand. No hate here, and none taught to me.<br /> <br />I suggest you look into subjects the Church actively shies away from and attempts to hide, so you can find "out for yourself the truth of the Restored Gospel."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7139169.post-26545106157328103222010-12-20T18:12:20.849-06:002010-12-20T18:12:20.849-06:00FelixandAva, please be careful of reacting emotion...FelixandAva, please be careful of reacting emotionally and mirroring back the same approach others use to defame us and exclude us as Christians. I disagree totally with jackg, and, frankly, I think the arguments and comments he left are rather juvenile and very weak, but that can be expressed without saying things like "not just wallowing in the hate you've been taught by those whose livelihood depends on keeping you from finding out for yourself the truth of the Restored Gospel." That is an assumption every bit as much as jackg's charges are - and it is every bit as offensive in and of itself. <br /><br />jackg, I have no problem accepting that Paul's epistles can be read as in conflict with what we teach in the LDS Church. I hope, however, that you are open-minded enough to admit that those same epistles and, more pointedly, the Gospels, can be read to support many Mormon teachings and be seen as in conflict with many Protestant teachings. <br /><br />It's not clear-cut, black-and-white when it comes to the Bible - especially since most of the doctrines of Mormomism toward which most Protestants react most vehemently actually are taken from the Bible. <br /><br />That actually supports the central point of Jeff's post - that doctrinal inerrancy is not used to condemn other Protestants, even when those Protestants have wildly different views on "central" doctrines of salvation. Where is that line, then, past which a saved Christian can't step without losing their status as saved - and, if it doesn't exist, what of the saved Christian who becomes Mormon?Papa Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06704974609266088416noreply@blogger.com