Charles Perry Locke wrote:
DaveH,DAVEH: Perry, as I have repeatedly said before, I'm not in TT to talk about Mormonism.....either it's virtue or (perceived) vices. If I want to read material antagonistic to the Church, I've got a web browser and know how to use it. So when somebody posts anything not of interest to me (and anti-LDS material is not high on my interest list), I just tend to ignore it and move on to something I find interesting.Why do you consdier "a lot of nonsense" the plethora of contradicting and
indicting statements coming directly from the LDS standard works and other
authoritaive momron lilterature which Kevin has cited?
Does that mean you doDAVEH: Most of that stuff has been around much longer than those who post it. For the most part, it is recycled material that lost its flavor long ago.
not have to deal with them if you ignore them? Well, they are not going
away!
Kevin seems to be a wizard at pulling out these blatant contradictions,DAVEH: And why not? To me, dumping a ton of material on me that I have little interest in reading is futile.
yet you completely ignore them!
The only conclusion I can come to is thatDAVEH: Believe what you want, Perry. (You seem to anyway, despite anything I might say.) Has it ever occurred to you that I don't have a lot of problems with much of what is said in TT to attack my beliefs? As I see it, those who want to denigrate LDS theology goes to great lengths to find contradictory statements, perceived doctrines that are blasphemous, outlandish, seemingly contradict popular Christian thought or Scripture. Apparently they think that we (LDS folks such as myself) will see it in the same light as they perceive it. But I don't think that happens at all. I have a different perspective that is not looking for the negative contrasts in my believes, but rather sees the harmony (logic, if you will).
there are contradicting and indicting statements that come directly from the
LDs standard works!!!
Let me give you an example....I believe we have the potential to become like God as we become one with God. To most, that seems blasphemous. Yet to me that is exactly what Scripture is trying to convey. Essentially, that is the message of the Bible. The problem is that most folks overlook that aspect, and focus in on the little details that are taken out of context. (Yeah.....I know there are going to be TTers rolling their eyes on that one, thinking I'm the pot calling the kettle black.) When God says to the Hebrews their is only one God, he is telling them to focus on Him and not the other distractions. The Lord fed the gospel to the world a bit at a time, and the more his people matured, the more he fed them. Toward the end of the Bible, the message became more obvious, that we too can become perfect as our Father in Heaven. And as an adherent of latter-day revelation, I believe more has been revealed to identify the Godly potential of man. But when others jump down my throat to condemn such thinking......how do you think I should react? Based on what I believe to be true, I have to (due to time/energy constraints) simply ignore the nonsense that is heaped on my plate. Does that make sense, Perry?
When you take one LDS document and look at one verse, line, or prophecyDAVEH: When/where did you ever get the idea I am in TT to find dirt about the LDS Church?
at a time, you can argue about it's validity, pull up biblical prooftexts,
quote one or two supporters, but what Kevin has done has shown the who
panopoly of thoughts, ideas, beliefs, of the LDS and their leaders, and IN
THE LARGE IT IS DAMNING of the LDS church! Your ONLY choices are to ignore
it, or else admit that your eternal destiny hangs on a house built of cards!
You say that when a prophet is not speaking "ex cathedra",DAVEH: I used that term?
it doesn'tDAVEH: Please quote me IF I said that. If I didn't say it, don't put words in my mouth, please.
count.
BUT HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN DIRECT CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THE BoM AND THEDAVEH: To me they agree when taken in context with LDS theology. That you can't see the agreement has little bearing on my comfort level in respect to these apparent contradictions. I could spend a considerable amount of time explaining it in detail, but I feel it would be wasted, as I don't think TTers would respond to my questions and points, but would rather heap a bunch more nonsense on my plate in an effort to distract/derail the discussion. Face it Perry.....the last thing most TTers want is a logical and thoughtful discussion about LDS theology on TT. The ONLY thing that makes most TTers happy about LDS theology is to show it to be false. That we might have an occasional truth (such as Jesus having a body of flesh and bones today), or even an interesting idea (that had Adam not transgressed---notice, I did not say sinned) in the Garden of Eden, none of us would be here (and yes, DavidM.....I am still trying to get back to that thread), or that I might teach something JS taught....is simply unacceptable to many TTers.
D&C??? One wife...polygamy. One God...Three Gods!!! YOUR OWN STANDARD WORKS
DO NOT EVEN AGREE!!!
So Perry......I don't understand why YOU don't understand why I don't respond to much of this nonsense. There is simply no way I can win if I allow myself to be led to the slaughter.
FTR.....I know what I believe, and I am not here to debate my beliefs. I am here to find out what you (non-LDS) folks believe. Yet many continually want to drag me into the slime pit to have a blood bath at my expense. No thank you.
Don't you ever feel trapped, or cheated,DAVEH: No. I do feel sorry for those who have no interest in finding out what LDS theology really means though. However, I do not feel it is my place to preach it in TT. If anybody wants to know about LDS theology, TT is the last place they will find it.
that the LDS have to continuallyDAVEH: I can see your perception that they are contradictions. Why do you think they don't bother me, Perry? Do I really seem that stupid to you? For those who think they can convert me away from Mormonism......hasn't it occurred to them that their approach is lacking something? As I said before, IF I were trying to sell something to somebody, the last thing I'd want to do is offend them by pointing out all their (perceived) weaknesses before I could explain the virtues of the product I'm selling them. That's about the best way I can think of of killing the sale before the sales pitch is even made.
make excuses and weave tales to cover the contradictions? Why can't you see
them?
It seems there are a few TTers who think I am offended by the underwear waving in SLC. Schucks Perry.....I've seen our underwear and it doesn't offend me at all. Like I said before.....IF the SPers in SLC enjoy waving my underwear at LDS folks at Conference time.....let 'em wave it 'til their arms drop off from exhaustion. I truly believe their obnoxious actions are counterproductive. The problem I see it though is that their is an unintended side effect that they may not have considered. If they were strictly trying to catch the LDS crowd's attention.....no problem. But it seems they are trying to embarrass the LDS folks by making a spectacle of the underwear in front of the world stage. It seems to me they perceive that it is only embarrassing to LDS folks IF the non-LDS folks are noticing their underwear waving demonstrations. Well Perry, to me that gives Jesus, if not Christianity as a whole, a black eye so to speak. If you were a non-Christian observing such antics, Perry.....what would you think of Christianity as a whole? That is what concerns me about this, Perry. I've asked them before, but I don't recall anybody answering......Do the street preachers consider the collateral damage they may be doing when they engage in silly behavior like waving underwear to attract attention???
Have you been blinded to contradiction within your own church? Are you
so programmed that to acknowledge these contradictions would cause your
brain to explode? WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF LOSING BY ADMITTING THESE
CONTRADICTIONS?Perry
>From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] No hell of Fire Brimstone-DaveH
>Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 07:16:30 -0800
>
>DAVEH: Kevin......If you want to have a relatively serious discussion
>about hell and oneness, I will be willing to share my thoughts with you
>in a respectful exchange of ideas. If on the other hand you wish merely
>to bloody my nose and overload me with a lot of nonsense, then I will
>refrain from responding to your posts as I don't have a lot of time to
>waste. How do you wish me to proceed?
>
>Kevin Deegan wrote:
>
> > DAVEH: I respectfully disagree. If we use your (Protestant derived)
> > definitions of heaven and hell, it will be easy to explain. I do not
> > believe non-Mormons will be cast into a literal lake of fire and
> > brimstone. Well that settles it then.There can't be a literal Hell,
> > Dave doesn't believe it.Those that are headed to Hell always want to
> > remodel first! According to the BoM 2 Nephi 28:21 the Devil taught him
> > there is no Hell.The BoM says it is a Place of ENDLESS TORMENT Jacob
> > 6:10Where people ares cast Alma 5:56Forever without end 2 Nephi
> > 9:16 Luke 16:28 Hell is a PLACE of tormentMT 8:12 a PLACE of WeepingPs
> > 18:5 a PLACE of SorrowsRev 14:11 a PLACE of NO RestRev 22:10 a PLACE
> > of FilthynessMT 13:48 a FURNACE of FireIS 33:14 EVERLASTING
> > BURNINGSWhere Joe & faithful Mormons are to look foward to being
> > EXALTED to EVERLASTING BURNINGS Teachings Prophet Joe Smith P347 In
> > Revelation 19 The beats & False Prophet are "cast alive into a lake of
> > fire Burning with Brimstone"Sometime later Rev 20:10 the Devil is cast
> > into the lake of fire and brimstone, WHERE the beast and the False
> > Prophet ARE, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
