This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
Locked on 01/26/2004 9:33:25 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator, reason:
This thread is now locked. It has served its purpose. thank you all for your participation and patience. |
Posted on 01/22/2004 6:34:29 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator
Okay then, if it must be reopened, pick whichever version seems better to you, what I said originally or what I proposed in its place, and go from there.
both allow that I would advocate such an "extermination" / "genocide"
I take offense to that
If you allow this sort of thing with the posters here the way they are -- and there is a great variety of poisonous bait like this at various anti-LDS websites -- it will be posted and reposted every few weeks, ignoring my replies, accompanied by fresh demands that I prove each detail wrong, and that it must be true in every detail if I don't, as though I had the time and resources of a historian dedicated to each of the many subjects brought up.
And of course the endless attempts to pass this persecution off as reasoned discourse, honest examination, and a willingness to examine the warts in the past.
It is precisely because of the very predictable ensuing discussion among the posters we now have and have had, that in allowing such material to be posted, you will see it an instrument of persecution, trying to flood the forum and drown everything positive out, concerning Latter-Day Saints, at the very time you are trying to have a better environment.
I was replying to #916 from the perspective of individuals. You perhaps are thinking of your #921 and thinking from a perspective of organized church denominations. People leave those all the time to go to the one they think God calls them to.
Do you think there will be Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Catholics, Lutherans, (orthodox) Episcopalians, etc., in the kingdom of heaven? There will just be The Church of Jesus Christ, made up of the faithful saints in Adam's day, the faithful saints of Noah's day, the faithful saints of Isaiah's day, the faithful saints of Peter's day, the faithful saints of these latter days, and all the other faithful saints of all ages of the world who love God with all their might, mind, and strength, their neighbor as themselves, and keep God's commandments. And the apostles and prophets the Lord sent to lead and guide them in mortality will continue in that relationship in the life to come.
It is individuals who are redeemed by the atoning blood of Christ, not denominations.
Now does that seem less like a non-sequitur?
I am very glad that you wouldn't, however, you did link to a guy who did, as someone who should have some credibility, and insisted that this was appropriate in a forum where the moderators are trying to improve the culture and reduce the flame wars.
And I claim that this sort of thing, if allowed, will get posted and reposted and reposted, fanning the flames of bitter prejudice. This guy is extreme, and so much of anti-LDS material published back then is this way.
You said near the beginning of this:
Your #853: it is not up to you to assess Maj Carletons sincerity
and I have been trying to say ever since (see my #898) (let's see if this is any better) that I do get to assess that, along with everyone else, that I consider the Major excessively sincere, I think he really meant it, and that whoever may advocate the extermination of an entire Christian denomination, trust me, I'll presume they really mean it, because it is no joking matter.
That leaves "you" (meaning singular, or plural, as in "you guys", or indefinite, as in "one", or whatever) completely out of it. The point is, I'll presume they really mean it.
I have a difficult time imagining what it is you think you're saying here. Maybe you mean that I, somehow, started diverting discussion from how Scripture plus other stuff stacks up by your own standards by which you criticize Scripture alone. But that would be silly. Or perhaps you mean that anything other than a panygeric to the rightness of all things Catholic is a "tangent".
But clearly, regardless of what you were trying to say, you were substituting a diversion (not merely a tangent) for an answer to my argument.
And quoting Luther on a doctrinal issue is "the standard anti-Protestant polemic of insulting Luther"? I had no idea that was verbotten.
Now, where did I say you couldn't attack historical Protestant figures? I'm not a Mormon, you know.
All I did was point out you reverted to one of the standard polemics instead of answering my argument.
There's no need to posit. Luther admitted it.
Drstevej has questioned this. We all await documentation.
Didn't prevent Luther from making an error? Never claimed it did. Never claimed it should. Never claimed it would. That nasty ol' free will business is always letting individuals go astray.
You don't think the leadership of the Catholic Church should prevent its priests and theology professors (and Luther was both) from falling into error? Yow!
Anyway, it doesn't matter if you said it or not; you need it to be true for your argument to hold up. It's not, so your argument doesn't. Remember, again, if the Bible plus other stuff can't keep people from falling into error and/or leaving, then you can't criticize the Bible by itself for failing to prevent people from falling into error and/or leaving. Well, you can, it just wouldn't do Catholicism any favors.
Again, thank you for this. I may even start posting to the religion forums once again. I have abstained for a long time because of the hateful attitudes that I encountered in the past.
God Bless you and God Bless Free Republic.
Faith seeks understanding.
--
St. Anselm, Proslogion proemiumAgain, I invite anyone who would like to have any of their posts to this thread deleted, simply send a "signed" abuse report to that effect. Abuse reports which are "unsigned" will not be removed.
A couple of added comments, if you will, one a reiteration, and the other a disappointment.
First, I still do not detect a sweeping spirit of forgiveness flowing through the Religion Forum, and I have to wonder what the future will hold without that happening. I won't repeat any of my words here, but any of you who have not read Post #881 should avail yourselves of the opportunity to do so.
Obviously for some of you, subtle suggestions from me have no effect. So - I will drop the subtlety.
In my future efforts at moderation when I find off-topic posts to any thread they will be removed. I haven't counted but my best guess is that roughly 200 posts could be removed from this thread as having nothing to do with the rules of the forum. Second subtle suggestion that didn't work: arguments - debates - differences - fights dragged from one thread to another will be deleted as found. And third, the on-going Mormon vs. non-Mormon war (and that's what it appears to be) has to stop. There is no way I can go back to the beginning and determine "who started it", even though I've received FReepmails from posters on both sides pointing fingers the other way. Not that "who started it" makes any difference, since the antagonists just keep it going. From my perspective the guilt is equally shared, and it's time to agree to a truce or accept an imposed armistice. This war is childish, folks, and it's a blight on the Religion Forum. It must stop. If you can't forgive and forget past transgressions, at least have the maturity to drop it and go on. In future, when I see hostilities breaking out anew I will ask once for it to stop. If it doesn't, then I'll have to stop it.
I'll "see" you all around the forum.
P.S. For whatever reason the 'ping' system did not pick up the following posters: 'cprfld'; 'eastrider'; 'Jmouse'; 'MarMena'; 'Unam Sanctum'.
Howdy, LM! I guess I'm the "token" Jew on the religion forum, as I participate here regularly. There are a number of others who join in occasionally, when a particular thread is of interest to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.