On intemperate and indiscreet zeal. (The Primary Fault of many Religion Forum posters)

Various | Various | Various

[Elsie]

 

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God.

 

---

---

---

"Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriage...

I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws..."

~ Wilford Woodruff, 4th LDS President

[Quix]

Well done rich satire.

Being all things to all people . . . seems like you are still leaving out categories because they are offensive to you instead of

because they are not kosher and useful from God’s perspective.

I do think you know, BTW, I’m not buying into the TULIP argument.

I’m fiesty for other reasons. LOL.

[Elsie]

What do you do when god tells your that the leaders of your church are wrong?

HA Ha ha!

What do you do when the U.S. Government tells you that what your GOD told you to do is ILLEGAL?

[Mad Dawg]

I think tolerating anti-Semitic harassment is in nearly every case wrong, even if the harassee deserves SOME harassment.

[Elsie]

What do you do when god tells your that the leaders of your church are wrong?

 

 

THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS

SECTION 101 

 

  96 And again, I say unto you, it is contrary to my commandment and my will that my servant Sidney Gilbert should sell my ^astorehouse, which I have appointed unto my people, into the hands of mine enemies.

 

 

(I guess they were NOT listening to GOD the first time.)

[Quix]

Boldness, forcefulness, and righteous anger have their place; but wrongly applied they become intemperate and indiscreet zeal...

LIKEWISE:

Sometimes meek, shy, retiring, and just trying to get along, can be just as effective as lukewarm puke.

INDEED.

Gotta put that on my home page.

Right now.

[Religion Moderator]

LOL!

[Elsie]

Ha ha!

He fooled me!

[Elsie]

 

Moreover, I can disagree with church leaders on a particular issue without concluding that they are false prophets.

 

 

Does your BISHOP know about this attitude you have?

 

---

---

 

"Any Latter-day Saint who denounces or opposes, whether actively or otherwise, any plan or doctrine advocated by the 'prophets, seers, and revelators' of the Church is cultivating the spirit of apostacy..."

(Improvement Era, June 1945, p. 354)

 

 

 

Reinforced here......

 

MP3 File

This is the audio clip of Dallin H. Oaks, current Mormon Apostle leader, from the PBS documentary, "The Mormons", declaring unequivocally:

"IT'S WRONG TO CRITICIZE LEADERS OF THE (MORMON) CHURCH, EVEN IF THE CRITICISM IS TRUE."

 

---

 

Don't criticize?

 

Dallin H. Oaks, Mormon Apostle 

 

 

 

And here:

 

Temple Recommend Questions:

 1 Do you have faith in and a testimony of God the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost?

 2 Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Christ and of His role as Savior and Redeemer?

 3 Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?

 4 Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?

 5 Do you live the law of chastity?

 6 Is there anything in your conduct relating to members of your family that is not in harmony with the teachings of the Church?

 7 Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

 8 Do you strive to keep the covenants you have made, to attend your sacrament and other meetings, and to keep your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?

 9 Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?

10 Are you a full-tithe payer?

11 Do your keep the Word of Wisdom?

12 Do you have financial or other oblgations to a former spouse or children? If yes, are you current in meeting those obligations?

13 If you have previously received your temple endowment:

     Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple?

     Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?

14 Have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?

15 Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord's house and participate in temple ordinances?

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

---

Oh, they can say that their leaders were NOT speaking for GOD when they said ___WHATEVER__ but that's NOT the same as criticizing!

---

---

 

( Remember fellow Christians:  the Mormon's criticize US because they've been taught that they CAN'T criticize ANY of their leaders; so they HAVE to vent somehow! )

[ejonesie22]

Usually I ignore it as long as possible, for things of this world shall pass...

[Quix]

Congrats.

I think the cost here was about $1,000/per tooth

[Elsie]

That’s NOTHIN’!

Colo. Sanders himself has appeared in Rachel, NV

Fly there on Goggle Earth...

[behzinlea]

I believe this thread was directed squarely at you and posters like you. True to form, you apparently have no clue.

Good day.

[ejonesie22]

It seems many no longer understand spiritual warfare. Much of that is an artifact of the watering down Christianity has suffered in America with the “all paths are valid” Oprah Winfrey approach.

But God and the Evil One have been locked in this battle for as long as time has existed and beyond.

We reach out to the victims of this war, those that have been pushed on paths that do not lead to the Glory of Christ with love and compassion and bring them home to the father.

As for the witting or unwitting foot soldiers of the Evil One however, we must never forget that is out and out warfare, not a pillow fight. Serve evil and expect to reap what you sow and do not expect the Christian to stand down...

Turn the other check is for our brothers and sisters in Christ, not for those from outside who attack him...

If some Christians do not have the stomach for such a fight, it is understandable, but do not stand in the way or worse, help those who in turn are attacking the very Savior and faith you profess to adore...

[Mad Dawg]

Actually, I find Catholic exegesis and interpretation, in the final analysis, more persuasive than that of the Reformers.

I came to that conclusion reluctantly.

But I note that even on this thread one of Paul’s major themes is ignored (or my posts referring to it are, at least) in support of the highly reformed view that since the elect are elect and God’s will is irresistible there is no reason for self-styled evangelists to worry about alienating people.

Of course the same line of thought would lead one to the conclusion that there is no need for evangelism ...

So, yeah, I think it’s worked out pretty well.

[Elsie]

Right now.

I checked: you did!

(Now can I go get breakfast?)

[Quix]

I would never want to rationalize nor excuse away personal, ego driven pique or meanness to get away with harshness etc.

I do think it is vital to operate clearly against ideas, perspectives, belief, dogma, practices that one is convinced before God are offensive to God vs

carrying on some personal vendetta or even crusade.

And, . . . to keep in mind always that the heart of ALL of us is deceitfully wicked, who can know it.

I still wonder if you are minimizing the benefit of VIGOROUS EXCHANGES . . . INTENSE EXCHANGES . . . ‘telling it like it is’ . . . like it is perceived to be . . .

AND that THAT BENEFIT does NOT always follow quickly behind.

I don’t think Paul’s exchanges with the pagans on Mars Hill were 100% graciously gentle. Maybe they were.

Certainly Christ’s exchanges with the religious rulers were not.

[Quix]

It just goes to show some indiscreet zeal is not as bad as the “offended” think.

---

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

And that’s true even when the motives are NOT 100% pure as the driven snow on a white hanky.

[Elsie]

I believe this thread was directed squarely at you and posters like you.

Of COURSE it was!

The poster is trying to SHAME us into being quiet; but if we were silent, the very ROCKS would cry out!

---

Thank you for meekly trying to correct my behaviour.

Perhaps it will work...

[Godzilla]

Linked by whom? The only ones I have known to use the phrase are enemies of the LDS church. I have never known Latter-day Saints to use it, much less recommend it.

Oh really logos. Fact of the matter is even apostle Oaks (1993) admits that mormons refer to this BY NAME -

Some have suggested that it is morally permissible to lie to promote a good cause. For example, some Mormons have taught or implied that lying is okay if you are lying for the Lord. . . . . As far as concerns our own church and culture, the most common allegations of lying for the Lord swirl around the initiation, practice, and discontinuance of polygamy.

He then goes on to justify it. Then he becomes conflicted and recants. Guess he just can't get it out of his system. He admits to the mormon practice BY NAME Logos.

The whole 'milk before meat' schick - Packer ("The Mantle is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect") commented ". The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat. The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively and some things are to be given only to those who are worthy." So don't tell the "whole truth" if it would lead anyone to doubt the claims of mormonism. Yet this is exactly what mormons do - right logos - tell half truths. Here is a prime example -

Time interview on August, 1997 Hinkley said:

"Q: Just another related question that comes up is the statements in the King Follett discourse by the Prophet. "Hinckley: Yeah

"Q: ... about that, God the Father was once a man as we were. This is something that Christian writers are always addressing. Is this the teaching of the church today, that God the Father was once a man like we are?

"Hinckley: I don't know that we teach it. I don't know that we emphasize it. I haven't heard it discussed for a long time in public discourse. I don't know. I don't know all the circumstances under which that statement was made. I understand the philosophical background behind it. But I don't know a lot about it and I don't know that others know a lot about it." (Time Magazine original transcript, Aug 4, 1997)

Come on logos - lying for the lord? Bob Millet continues to encourage the practice to missionaries even today.