It is currently Sat Nov 18, 2017 7:56 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 11:55 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:02 am
Posts: 13353
I would encourage anyone thinking about engaging MG to run through this chart in order to determine their ROI on their time:

Image

- Doc

_________________
I have Mental Gymnast on ignore until he makes amends with Grindael, and both Grindael and IHAQ start posting again. I will not allow a troll to drive off two great board members without taking a stand.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 11:58 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am
Posts: 2799
mentalgymnast wrote:
Morley wrote:
You're reaching.

MG wrote:
That's what a mentalgymnast does. : wink:

Morley wrote:
And that is the problem.

Attack mode, here we go. I figured this would happen sooner or later.

Calling you on your bologna is not attack mode. When asked to explain, you shrug it off and admit that 'reaching' is your calling card and what your name is based on. That's a problem in any respectful discussion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:03 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am
Posts: 2799
mentalgymnast wrote:
Morley wrote:
You send us off to read books or articles, to navigate extensive quotes, all that you maintain say things they don't.

That is a wild generalization that you can not prove to be fact one way or the other. The fact IS, I have read the books that I have linked to, etc., and my thinking HAS been influenced directly by what other folks have researched and thoughtfully considered/discussed. Again, you are mischaracterizing what is actually the truth. That is not only disingenuous, it is untrue.

I'm not suggesting you haven't read the books and articles. I'm suggesting they don't remotely make the arguments you claim that they've made. When challenged, you deflect, or say "oh well."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:14 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am
Posts: 2799
mentalgymnast wrote:
Well, yes, I'll plead 'guilty' to that at times. But I don't see why that is a concern or problem of yours. If you don't want to engage, don't. But, truth be told, I appreciate it when folks DO engage and ask questions rather than just tossing stuff off with personal insults, etc. It's worth my time if I'm able to stimulate my own thinking and hopefully that of others.

Which is why your arguments aren't taken seriously.

It's concern of mine because I'm engaging you. To say something is a problem is not a personal insult. To say that "this is why you're not taken seriously" is also not a personal insult.

If I recall, you complain that some posters do not take you seriously, do not really read your points, do not engage on the level you wish they would.

Personally, I'd be more than pleased if you want to point out which of my arguments or posting behaviors is not taken seriously and why that's the case. It's been done plenty of times before on this board and my understanding is better for it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:17 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:15 am
Posts: 5342
Location: The Land of Lorn
Quote:
And mixed them up into some speculative doctrine/practice that later found itself wanting in regards to correct application of eternal principles.


Exactly the reason that prophets are superfluous. Not needed. Because ALL THEY DO is speculate and their teachings are found wanting. A great case for why we don't need Mormon "prophets", because there is no way to know if the PRINCIPLES are from God either.

Thank you.

_________________
"I will not in any way, shape, or form have anything to do with or have anything to say to [grindael] from here on out. Directly OR INDIRECTLY" ~MG, 10-25-17, 12:36PM The SAME DAY, an hour later... "I decided that I needed to also create a publicly posted thread, as he did..." FIRST indirect comment. So much for his "DMZ".


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:19 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am
Posts: 2799
mentalgymnast wrote:
Morley wrote:
Many here engage you with good will and charity, but don't get the impression that said attitude is reciprocated.


Not quite sure where you're going with this. The thing is, I DO engage OTHERS with good will and charity and would expect, hopefully, to be treated the same way.


Good will and charity. It doesn't always read that way. But I'll take your word for it.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:25 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:19 am
Posts: 2799
mentalgymnast wrote:
But it looks...if I'm reading you correctly on this post...we may have reached an end in our discussion. That's fine. But thanks for what we had. It stimulated some more thinking in my noggin. : wink:

You're not reading me correctly.

If you want to end the discussion, don't blame it on me. You know, kind of the way you're blaming the Church's racism on God in the following exchange:

mentalgymnast wrote:
Morley wrote:
What does this have to do with more than a hundred years of the Church's institutionalized racism?

Men thinking that they were acting upon principle. And in a way, they were. Principles/behaviors that they were raised with, etc. But those principles conflicted with principles that...one would hope...are eternal principles which, if understood correctly, lead towards doctrine is is all inclusive. Inasmuch as all are equally loved by God and that He has a plan...based upon love...that will encourage the progress/development of all of His children.

So Brigham was a man of time that had principles. Learned eternal principles. And mixed them up into some speculative doctrine/practice that later found itself wanting in regards to correct application of eternal principles. The institution kept them in place. Afterall, a prophet taught it, right?

The thing is, it may actually be ONLY God that fully understands principles/doctrines/truths and the interplay between them. Men struggle along the way to conform/adapt to God's understanding or way of thinking.

"My ways are not your ways...My thoughts are not your thoughts."

Regards,
MG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:39 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 1:01 am
Posts: 6640
mentalgymnast wrote:
Men thinking that they were acting upon principle. And in a way, they were. Principles/behaviors that they were raised with, etc. But those principles conflicted with principles that...one would hope...are eternal principles which, if understood correctly, lead towards doctrine is is all inclusive. Inasmuch as all are equally loved by God and that He has a plan...based upon love...that will encourage the progress/development of all of His children.


In what way did those men act in contrary to the doctrine of the Church? That’s right, they didn’t.

They were reinforcing the doctrine, that black skin is a sign of unrighteousness.

A doctrine that still exists in the canon of the Church today.

Of course, what you are really saying in your convoluted paragraph above, is that you now know better what God meant than did the Prophets of the Church for the first 100 years of the Restoration.

_________________
“A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth. Authoritarian institutions and marketers have always known this fact.”
― Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize Winner, 'Thinking, Fast and Slow'


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:04 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:45 pm
Posts: 1856
The Soap Maker wrote:
Z - in your response, you mentioned that that the leaders of the church are able to know god and Jesus in a very intimate and personal way. Can I assume that you mean that these men speak to/interact with god and Jesus face-to-face, like Joseph Smith claimed to have done?
I believe that they have the authorization to do so should the purposes of their ministry require it; but that does not mean that they have lunch with them every day. Joseph Smith didn't claim to have breakfast with God and Jesus every morning either. Joseph Smith says in his journal history somewhere (I have to paraphrase from memory, because I don't have the exact quote with me right now) words to the effect that "It is a great thing to enter into the presence of the Lord or inquire at his hand, and we are fearful to approach him". If you think that Joseph Smith had a kind of cellphone and he could talk to God just like that, that is not how it worked. To approach God preparation is required, humility is required, faith is required, seriousness of intent is required, occasion is required. That is how it was with Joseph Smith, and that is how it is today. However, I believe it is possible for someone to be filled with the Spirit of God to such an extent that he can know the mind and will of God at all times, without necessarily having to enter God's presence directly, or commune with him at a personal level.
Quote:
If so, then, in your opinion, why do you think the leaders of the church aren't willing to come out and proclaim so, like Joseph Smith did?
That is because the times are different. In those days people generally were more inclined to believe in the supernatural than they are today. Also in those days the Church was still in the process of being organized, and those manifestations were a necessary part of the process of that organization. Now that the Church is well established, there is less need for those kinds of manifestations; and when they occur, it is not necessary or appropriate in our time to publicly discuss them.
Quote:
Why do they refer to it as using the ambiguous term, special witness?
It is not an ambiguous term. I is the term that God himself uses in revealed scripture, as previously quoted. If it is good enough for God, it is good enough for us.

_________________
zerinus
I am a Mormon!

http://zerinus.blogspot.co.uk
http://amazon.com/author/bijhan


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:01 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
Morley wrote:

I'm not suggesting you haven't read the books and articles. I'm suggesting they don't remotely make the arguments you claim that they've made.


They inform/stimulate my thinking. Isn't that one of the reasons that we read? My thoughts/speculations...to some extent anyway...have roots in the books/articles that I've read along the way. I'm not making the author's arguments word for word.

My thoughts are my thoughts. And often I'm formulating them 'on the fly'. That often doesn't go over very well with some folks. I'm perfectly willing to go back and rethink and even reformulate what I've written IF I think that I've gone down a track that seems to be headed in the wrong direction. And if others convince me that this is so. Often, however, I'm not convinced. :smile:

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Last edited by mentalgymnast on Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:08 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
Morley wrote:
Calling you on your bologna is not attack mode.


Only when you write that what I'm saying is "pure gibberish" and respond to what I've written with a simple "Wow". And then leave it at that until I ask you to elaborate and flesh things out a bit.

Again, there wasn't any "bologna" to call me out on in this thread...so I don't know why you would even say this.

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:20 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
Morley wrote:

If I recall, you complain that some posters do not take you seriously, do not really read your points, do not engage on the level you wish they would.

Personally, I'd be more than pleased if you want to point out which of my arguments or posting behaviors is not taken seriously and why that's the case. It's been done plenty of times before on this board and my understanding is better for it.


In this thread I would be and am happy to have you point out what you see as flawed thinking. I may or may not agree with you...but I'm not opposed to having others engage what they think is reasoning that hasn't been fully articulated and/or fleshed out in a meaningful way.

This thread was moving right along with a lot of 'back and forth' until...

Something took it off the rails. And I don't think it was me. :wink:

But this sort of back and forth with wagging/pointing fingers does seems to be the cul-de-sac we end up in quite often. I'm always willing to back up and restart the discussion at the point where things seemingly go off the rails...but things don't always seem to work out that way. :sad:

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:35 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
grindael wrote:
Quote:
And mixed them up into some speculative doctrine/practice that later found itself wanting in regards to correct application of eternal principles.


Exactly the reason that prophets are superfluous. Not needed. Because ALL THEY DO is speculate and their teachings are found wanting. A great case for why we don't need Mormon "prophets", because there is no way to know if the PRINCIPLES are from God either.

Thank you.


You actually make a good point there grindael.

But if the prophets weren't there, neither would be the keys/authority to carry out and administer the saving ordinance of baptism. Neither would be the ordinances/covenants of the temple be operative/effective. Neither would be the possibility of the First Presidency and the Twelve 'getting it right' quite often and in important ways which have benefited many of God's children. Placement of temples. Moral guidance and direction. Church welfare program. Missionary system...to name a few.

Where I think you're mistaken is in looking at this as an 'all or nothing' proposition. Either the prophet gets it right all of the time or he is of no use.

Oh, and the prophets have specifically encouraged us to know for ourselves whether or not the things they're teaching are true. So ultimately, it is up to us as to whether we accept each and every thing they teach as being either a true doctrine or a doctrine based upon a foundation of true principles.

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:19 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
Morley wrote:
...you're blaming the Church's racism on God in the following exchange:

mentalgymnast wrote:
Men thinking that they were acting upon principle. And in a way, they were. Principles/behaviors that they were raised with, etc. But those principles conflicted with principles that...one would hope...are eternal principles which, if understood correctly, lead towards doctrine is is all inclusive. Inasmuch as all are equally loved by God and that He has a plan...based upon love...that will encourage the progress/development of all of His children.

So Brigham was a man of his time that had principles. He learned eternal principles and then admixtured them up into some speculative doctrine/practice that later found itself wanting in regards to correct application of eternal principles. The institution kept them in place. Afterall, a prophet taught it, right?

The thing is, it may actually be ONLY God that fully understands principles/doctrines/truths and the interplay between them. Men struggle along the way to conform/adapt to God's understanding or way of thinking.

"My ways are not your ways...My thoughts are not your thoughts."

Nope, that's not what I was doing at all.

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 6:39 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 2:39 pm
Posts: 6587
Morley wrote:

If you want to end the discussion, don't blame it on me.


I am open to discussion, but I don't see how it can continue in a productive way if what we're writing is pushed off as "gibberish". Even if it may not be fully fleshed out. Sometimes posts might be made in between doing other things and there may be a glitch here and a glitch there. The post that you're referring to, however, isn't gibberish, IMO. Incomplete in execution. Maybe. But I'm willing to come back to it if something in particular is pointed out.

I went back and read the post in question. A possible need to flesh it out a bit more? Maybe. And that's what I did when one or more folks asked for more clarification. But pure gibberish? Not.

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:32 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:15 am
Posts: 5342
Location: The Land of Lorn
Quote:
Either the prophet gets it right all of the time or he is of no use.


Ridiculous. They never get it right. They never have. Tell me, why hasn't one Mormon "prophet" raised anyone from the dead? In front of witnesses like Jesus did? Signs follow them who believe. Why is your "prophet" cooped up in an office building and not out among the people healing the sick, helping others, ALL OTHERS, not just Mormons. None of them are anything like Jesus.

They are vultures and Mormonism is a con. The love of money is the root of all evil. To them, it's all about money. They are all false prophets who have never gotten anything right. They run a corporation, not a church. They are not the only ones. They have lots of company. Sealing keys and Priesthood authority? ____.

_________________
"I will not in any way, shape, or form have anything to do with or have anything to say to [grindael] from here on out. Directly OR INDIRECTLY" ~MG, 10-25-17, 12:36PM The SAME DAY, an hour later... "I decided that I needed to also create a publicly posted thread, as he did..." FIRST indirect comment. So much for his "DMZ".


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 7:12 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 6:40 pm
Posts: 7641
Location: What does the fox say?
Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
I would encourage anyone thinking about engaging MG to run through this chart in order to determine their ROI on their time:

Image

- Doc


Now get Zerinus to follow these guidelines and you will have something. ;)

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 7:12 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 6:40 pm
Posts: 7641
Location: What does the fox say?
dupe

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2017 7:55 pm 
Sunbeam
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:11 am
Posts: 59
Location: The Shire
According to the D&C, the Q12 and Qo70 are equal in authority. The statement by the church says otherwise. Where in modern scripture is that change written?

_________________
~ 2BizE


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:36 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:15 am
Posts: 5342
Location: The Land of Lorn
Quote:
Oh, and the prophets have specifically encouraged us to know for ourselves whether or not the things they're teaching are true. So ultimately, it is up to us as to whether we accept each and every thing they teach as being either a true doctrine or a doctrine based upon a foundation of true principles.


No, it isn't "up to us", it's up to them. Just try claiming they are not really prophets and see where that gets you. You HAVE to accept them as such and what they declare and if you don't agree you can't voice it or you will be out of the church. That's exactly what Denver Snuffer did. The Corporation is a dictatorship, there is no free will involved. Either you agree or disagree and KEEP SILENT. There is no tolerance for dissension, or disagreeing with them and making it public. It absolutely IS all or nothing. They are frauds, who enforce silence mercilessly. It is not a culture where ideas can grow, that is why the Corporation is stagnant and can do nothing but make rote declarations that mean literally nothing. There will be no new doctrines, no new "revelations", only retreaded correlation, which, ironically is what Smith and the founding members were totally against when they set up the Church at the beginning. They have become what was loathed by Smith. The con has played itself out. It is now simply a money making machine which only a select few reap the benefits of. Not unlike many other so called "Christian" organizations. But by all means keep the con alive for as long as you can.

Quote:
What we get out of general conference is a build-up of our spirits as we listen to those particular principles and practices of the gospel which the Lord inspires the present leadership of the Church to bring to our attention at the time. He knows why he inspired Brother Joseph F. Merrill to give the talk he just gave. He knows why he inspired the other brethren who have talked in this conference to say what they have said. It is our high privilege to hear, through these men, what the Lord would say if he were here. If we do not agree with what they say, it is because we are out of harmony with the Spirit of the Lord.” (Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1950, p.126)


So it isn't up to "us". You want to have it both ways, but you can't.

But keep spouting the apologist BS. I expect no less from you.

_________________
"I will not in any way, shape, or form have anything to do with or have anything to say to [grindael] from here on out. Directly OR INDIRECTLY" ~MG, 10-25-17, 12:36PM The SAME DAY, an hour later... "I decided that I needed to also create a publicly posted thread, as he did..." FIRST indirect comment. So much for his "DMZ".


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: "How To Define Mormon Doctrine"
PostPosted: Sun Sep 10, 2017 8:28 am 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 12:25 pm
Posts: 5960
grindael wrote:
Quote:
Oh, and the prophets have specifically encouraged us to know for ourselves whether or not the things they're teaching are true. So ultimately, it is up to us as to whether we accept each and every thing they teach as being either a true doctrine or a doctrine based upon a foundation of true principles.


No, it isn't "up to us", it's up to them....

Quote:
It is our high privilege to hear, through these men, what the Lord would say if he were here. If we do not agree with what they say, it is because we are out of harmony with the Spirit of the Lord.” (Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1950, p.126)


So it isn't up to "us". You want to have it both ways, but you can't.

This is an interesting point. When your children are very young, you might let them practice making a "choice," but if they make the wrong choice, you step in and help them make the right choice. For adults however, calling a process like that "making a choice," or saying it is "up to us" is inaccurate.

Considering how many times the LDS church has had to change what they believe, or define a prophet's words as incorrect because they were (only after the fact) coming from a man, it is also a dangerous and foolish process in which to blindly submit oneself.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 191 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DrW, Google [Bot], omni, Philo Sofee, Res Ipsa and 46 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group