Posted on 08/30/2010 6:33:31 AM PDT by Jenny Hatch
R that is funny.
It is not really funny must do a complete system restore
Okay...I've broken my rule.
This is absolutely crazy talk, Norm.
So..I ask you, what did The Son Of God die for.....if you guy's can just baptize the dead?
Are you actually really okay with this? Because you all are basically saying Jesus Christ died for nothing.
Wow...!!
I note that you both appear to have ignored my posts due to your lack of a reply. In them I refuted both of your assertions about the “anti’s”. I also posted to you that I had originally offered my prayers to the Bishop’s family. It wasn’t until others had started their smear campaign against the “anti’s” that this thread took on a life of its own and veered in whole other direction.
I also note you persist in addressing the true perpetrators of the smears on this thread and calling for them to cease. In effect, you are complicit in their statements/assertions by refusing to refute them.
I note again, that both of you insist on deflecting, trying to make this about the “anti’s” when it was the mormons and their “defenders” who started this flame war. Apologist’s to the end? Ends justify the means?
Like I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, I’m grateful my MORMON wife doesn’t behave as you or the others do.
This is a tragedy for both families directly affected by this man’s actions.
The fact that others have used this tragedy to begin a smear campaign to impugn the character of FReepers who question the mormon doctrine and dogma is a secondary tragedy. Collateral damage if you will.
Who wrote that for you?
No but I'm in a discipline that evaluates evidence and where precision in thought and word is needed.
No parsing is needed of your post (#141) which started this dialogue. Its insulting tone and lack of intellectual contribution is evident to all.
Ok, that I get. I just thought you were making a joke about yourself.
“It wasn’t until others had started their smear campaign against the ‘anti’s’ that this thread took on a life of its own “
You just lost all credibility.
Now I understand why you are a mormon.
As usual you can ramble om with your “creative fiction” all you but the facts just slap you down every time.
If you had any connection to reality you would realize it and just stop embarrassing yourself, but really you work to our advantage post after post so just keep to your little universe...
You meant NOT addressing.....
Correct?
Hi Osage,
Yes, I am OK with baptism for the dead.
We believe sacrifice of Jesus Christ is universal in its effect and applies to the living and the dead.
Those who don’t get the chance to hear the gospel in this life will hear it in the next world and will have the opportunity for baptism through baptisms for the dead.
I think it is very fair and in keeping with the merciful and just character of God.
Best regards,
Normandy
do not want to wrangle over he said, she said if you say you did not smear good thank you!
Have a nice day!
It makes many scriptures meaningless also.
That's blasphemy, FRiend. And you and your religion is horribly deceived.
May you see the light, before your end.
I meant your considering him “like a scab he...”
As far as baptism for the dead is concerned, it is a gift we offer to someone who has died — but it is up to them whether they accept it or not.
___________________________________________
Did anyone record the words of Obama’s Mom, Stanley Ann Durham when she was offerred the gift and accepted in June 2008 ???
What did she say ???
I guess all those poor dead people have to be dead dunked all over again...
I hope the mormons kept good records...
Also what if someone got dead dunked for lots of people
and then they died and committed some trespass against the mormon creeds in the afterlife...
Does someone come back and report it so there can be more dead dunking ???
So much dead dunking so little time..
Oh, I forgot, you don’t think I’m a Christian because I’m a Mormon even though I have told you that I would shout it from the rooftops that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, Lord, and Soon Coming King.
_________________________________________
Yeah you seem to have forgotten to do that shouting...
If it hasnt been important enough for you to deo what you boasted back in February then the LORD Jesus Christ is just not that important to you...
BTW you are the one who keeps telling me why you are no longer a Christian...
Since you are an ex-Christian and an avowed anti-Christian where would I ever get the idea you were still a Christian ???
This is bizarre
________________________________________
The only thing that is bizarre is the way this poor man was treated by the mormon corporation...
I do hope it all comes out...
Well his final actions are inexcusable, the actions of the mormons around him may prove to have contributed to the murder...
It's real simple: A member becoming an ex- member may actually be more dependant upon the Lds church than the member himself.
Why do I say that? Because if a church member wants to stay, and the Lds church wants to ex-communicate them, then it doesn't really matter what the church member does, anyway, if the church is bound & determined to ex-communicate.
If you reverse it, and if the member is distancing himself from the church, it doesn't really matter what he does to complete the process -- UNLESS and UNTIL the church takes him off the rolls.
Yes, once it becomes official.
Wait a minute. I just asked if roll removal is "automatic" (the moment of). And you said "yes?" But then you qualified it by adding, once it becomes official." So it's "automatic" even if it takes seven years "to become official?"
You're hilarious, Rip. (But thanks for showing us how Lds apologists maneuver about in plain five-word sentences)
Let me make it clear to you what I'm saying: If the church claims this guy resigned his membership in 2004, I don't have to contend anything different. What I'm saying is that his ultimate membership status, however, isn't going to be determined by his actions, but rather by the church bureaucracy.
The Lds church can tell me this guy resigned his membership in 2004 til they're blue in the face. My point is, "OK, but was he still on the official Lds rolls?"
So, let's get on the same page here: Let's move from whatever actions this guy did to remove himself -- and let's answer the direct question here: "WHEN, Rip, did THE CHURCH remove him???"
Were I to be a betting man, I'd say it wasn't 2004. So when, if it happened, DID it happen?
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.