OK you potential Bishops out there

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Based on what?

It is just a gut feeling. No I am not going to research yours and Tex's posts and provide links and proof. If you think I am wrong, that is OK with me.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I think most Mormons would find this forum extreme.

Most of the cultural Utah Mormons would find this extreme, but most members of the LDS Church, especially converts would not.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

It doesn't surprise me that you would come out in defense of people unable to back up baseless accusations.

Says you.

I would submit that your bizarre "we are not allowed to seek the truth" stance is at odds with LDS doctrine. I seriously doubt a majority of members would think that way.

[Indy Coug]

Contrary to what appears to be popular opinion, Tex and I aren't in lock step one with another on everything in this forum, and sometimes even when we take a similar stance, it's the result of distinctly different rationale.

Sometimes, I disagree with Tex but he's already getting dog-piled on so heavily that I don't feel like I need to add to the feeding frenzy.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Tex

Maybe I misunderstood. Was he not accusing me, Rocky-Balboa-like, of harboring views extreme to the Mormon mainstream?

If no such statements actually exist, would that not suggest the opposite?



The point is, it's an opinion shared by the majority of Mormons. In my opinion.

Well we will just have to disagree. Most mormons do not feel all the counsel given by the brethern applies to them. I actually know of a case where the counsel given by the brethern was not felt to apply by an Apostle to him and his child. I won't go into details, but I know that for a fact.

Oh, he remained an active apostle until his death.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Are you saying most Mormons are mullahs?

No, but mullahs are absolutely convinced that they represent the pure and true form of the religion. And they see a need to fight heresy.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Says you.

I would submit that your bizarre "we are not allowed to seek the truth" stance is at odds with LDS doctrine. I seriously doubt a majority of members would think that way.

Tex's blind adherence to counsel of leaders, we're not allowed to seek inspiration regarding the scriptures save confirmation, support the leaders at all costs type of mantra and a host of other beliefs diverge from the beliefs of most thinking LDS. Tex expresses the mantras of fundamentalists well.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Tex: Do you believe that those members who follow all of the church leaders' counsel are more righteous than those who do not?

Is it possible to compare one person's righteousness with another's?

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Contrary to what appears to be popular opinion, Tex and I aren't in lock step one with another on everything in this forum, and sometimes even when we take a similar stance, it's the result of distinctly different rationale.

Sometimes, I disagree with Tex but he's already getting dog-piled on so heavily that I don't feel like I need to add to the feeding frenzy.

Pile on. Sometimes I think Tex actually has a weird fetish and enoys getting shitted on.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Says you.

I would submit that your bizarre "we are not allowed to seek the truth" stance is at odds with LDS doctrine. I seriously doubt a majority of members would think that way.

Like Arch's ridiculous post, you have distorted my view. I did not say we are not allowed to seek truth. I said we are not allowed to declare new doctrinal truth outside of the guidelines of what the prophet has stated.

This is not an extra-mainstream view. It goes all the way back to Hiram Page.

But, no need to re-hash it. It's enough to understand that you and so many others are completely incapable of backing up your accusations without gross distortions.