General questions for the board,

[ute4ever]

Grapevine it is good to know you act in full accordance with the prophet's most recent Priesthood talk, abhorring racism of any kind.

[ute4ever]

Way to kick that habit. Are you currently sporting the one month or three month pin?

[non sequitur]

Originally Posted by shobeewan

My multiple questions regarding membership of the church stems from the basic precepts of the gospel. If Jesus is not the head of the church, or if GBH doesn't speak for him there are tons of other church's that you can have alot more fun in than this one, and it is a sincere question of why are you hanging around?

I can't speak for anybody else, but I can tell you why I "hang around". I was raised in the Church, married in the Church, gradated from a Church school, all of my immediate and extended family are active Church members, and all of my neighbors are members of the Church. The Church is a big part of my life. Do I believe the Church is true and that its leaders have a pipeline to God? Absolutely not! I hang around because I'm still a member of the Church culture.

Most Church leaders are sincere, well-meaning people, but when it comes to certain issues I think many of them have severe blind spots. If I thought their missteps were benign, I wouldn't bother to speak out against them. But when I feel their actions are morally objectionable, I'm not going to hesitate to condemn them. It's easy for me to condemn them though, because I don't look to them for leadership. Others on the board find themselves in a much more difficult position. They must reconcile their devotion to their religion with their own personal moral compass. While some (and by "some" I of course mean JL and SWP ) neatly defer all questions of right and wrong to their scriptures and their religious leaders, it is difficult for others to completely abandon their own sense of right and wrong.

The part of your post that I find the most interesting, though, is your suggestion that those who don't think GBH speaks for God, should find a Church that's more fun. Aside from the comical notion that any Church might be fun, is the idea that someone needs a "Church". There are thousands of religions in the world, and you have rejected them all except for one. Why have you rejected them? If the day ever came when you rejected this Church, what makes you think you would change your mind about all the others that you have already rejected?

[RockyBalboa]

There is a prevalent liberal attitude in not hesistating to question and malign a prophet of God on here by posters such as Non-Sequitur, Hoyacoug, RobinFinderson and others.

It's what happens when one obviously feel their stances of what they feel is morally objectionable is more important that what Jesus Christ thinks. The Prophet speaks for and behalf of Christ, and they forget that, don't believe that, or don't care.

[SoCalCoug]

Rocky, I think you're a little harsh on those guys. Non sequitur and Robin Finderson have made it clear they don't consider themselves LDS any more - You can't really get on them for not believing in what a prophet they don't believe in says.

I know you and hoya are like oil and water, but I don't think hoya has gone over the line in his questioning of policy. I certainly haven't seen him "malign" a prophet - unless by questioning things that have been said is the equivalent of "maligning" him.

I'm one of those who thinks discussion of issues and policies is good, and we shouldn't be afraid to share our opinions.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

Rocky, I think you're a little harsh on those guys. Non sequitur and Robin Finderson have made it clear they don't consider themselves LDS any more - You can't really get on them for not believing in what a prophet they don't believe in says.

I know you and hoya are like oil and water, but I don't think hoya has gone over the line in his questioning of policy. I certainly haven't seen him "malign" a prophet - unless by questioning things that have been said is the equivalent of "maligning" him.

I'm one of those who thinks discussion of issues and policies is good, and we shouldn't be afraid to share our opinions.

I think the sharing of ideas and discussions is a good one as well. I've never been against that and never will be. However, when a member of the church openly criticizes the LITERAL mouthpiece on earth for Jesus Christ, it is simply them fulfilling prophecy as far as I'm concerned. It is incumbent upon them REGARDLESS of political belief to support Jesus Christ. The prophet doesn't make a declaration based on personal belief, and that might be news to some.

In hindsights perhaps my comments were a bit harsh, seeing as I fall on a completely different side of faith and belief as Robin and NS do, but they carry a haughty smugness in their mocking tone of those who do believe and believe strongly and for that I will always stand against and speak out against and make aboslutely zero apologies for it. It's too bad more don't have the guts to do the same.

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

I think the sharing of ideas and discussions is a good one as well. I've never been against that and never will be. However, when a member of the church openly criticizes the LITERAL mouthpiece on earth for Jesus Christ, it is simply them fulfilling prophecy as far as I'm concerned. It is incumbent upon them REGARDLESS of political belief to support Jesus Christ. The prophet doesn't make a declaration based on personal belief, and that might be news to some.

In hindsights perhaps my comments were a bit harsh, seeing as I fall on a completely different side of faith and belief as Robin and NS do, but they carry a haughty smugness in their mocking tone of those who do believe and believe strongly and for that I will always stand against and speak out against and make aboslutely zero apologies for it. It's too bad more don't have the guts to do the same.

Yeah, I think there is a smugness there. The thing that bugs me is that if you don't agree with the liberal attitutdes (some of which I kind of agree with to an extent), you're viewed as ignorant. At least that's impression I've gotten.

My other pet peeve is the bashing of apostles, like Bruce R. McConkie and Ezra Taft Benson or Boyd K. Packer, by some of the active LDS liberals. Some people ridicule and discount everything that came out of BRM's mouth. Don't agree with what he said, fine. But don't trash an ordained apostle of God.

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by grapevine

Imagine how confusing it would be though if philosiphy proffesers and people that think they know best.

Speaking of confusing... You might want to run your posts by a philosophy professor or even just someone who "thinks they know best" before you actually post them.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Venkman

Yeah, I think there is a smugness there. The thing that bugs me is that if you don't agree with the liberal attitutdes (some of which I kind of agree with to an extent), you're viewed as ignorant. At least that's impression I've gotten.

My other pet peeve is the bashing of apostles, like Bruce R. McConkie and Ezra Taft Benson or Boyd K. Packer, by some of the active LDS liberals. Some people ridicule and discount everything that came out of BRM's mouth. Don't agree with what he said, fine. But don't trash an ordained apostle of God.

You know, I'm trying to be less smug. I'll try a little harder. Most of the most important people in my life are believers, so if I come across as 'smug' I will try to take that constructively and be less smug.

Cheers,

R.F.

[Colly Wolly]

Guys, just come back to Church and worship like the rest of us brainwashed zombies. Ignorance is bliss!