another argument for gay marriage

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not sure why you're so hostile that I think scripture expresses my feelings best.

They are not your words, the words are not modern. Borrowing another's words is a cop-out.

I have rarely seen you express yourself uniquely with your own words. It's almost as if you do a topical guide search to see how you're supposed to feel and insert those words instead of express yourself in modern prose. I imagine your own words might be more enlightening than you let on.

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not sure why you're so hostile that I think scripture expresses my feelings best.

Joy is not something you can derive in a laboratory.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Anything can be studied, broken down and understood.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Archaea

They are not your words, the words are not modern. Borrowing another's words is a cop-out.

I have rarely seen you express yourself uniquely with your own words. It's almost as if you do a topical guide search to see how you're supposed to feel and insert those words instead of express yourself in modern prose. I imagine your own words might be more enlightening than you let on.

I actually laughed out loud when I read that. I've got 8000 posts on this message board, and Arch thinks I "rarely" express myself with my own words. Ha.

Originally Posted by Archaea

I disagree. Anything can be studied, broken down and understood.

That is part of your problem.

21 Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth?
22 Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

I actually laughed out loud when I read that. I've got 8000 posts on this message board, and Arch thinks I "rarely" express myself with my own words. Ha.

For the most part, you do the hit and run thing, and borrow words of another.

Originally Posted by Tex

That is part of your problem.

That insult doesn't work on me, Tex.

Those words are fluff. I know the experiences they pertain to, but that is the cop out Mormons engage in. We engage in groupspeak, allowing the words of others to silence our own voices.

Those words are slightly arrogant. They speak as those if you agree with and speak in the same dialect, that you will share in the experience, therefore you are convinced and believe. "The Spirit of truth" is shorthand for a few concepts, sometimes referring to the influence of the Holy Ghost which whispers to the mind and heart, sometimes it refers to scriptural references and sometimes it can also refer to instincts.

"Preacheth and edified one another" speaks to having one's words confirmed to the listener by the Holy Ghost.

The final pericope is the insult, and I'll just leave that one be. People are quite capable of understanding without agreeing with the methodology. I shun the commonplace because it shows a lack of effort to impart one's own efforts.

Once again, you've proven my point, that you, who are probably quite bright, are unwilling to speak your own mind. For once, I'd rather read you reason it out in your own words.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Archaea

For the most part, you do the hit and run thing, and borrow words of another.

That's just nonsense.

Originally Posted by Archaea

That insult doesn't work on me, Tex.

Those words are fluff. I know the experiences they pertain to, but that is the cop out Mormons engage in. We engage in groupspeak, allowing the words of others to silence our own voices.

Those words are slightly arrogant. They speak as those if you agree with and speak in the same dialect, that you will share in the experience, therefore you are convinced and believe. "The Spirit of truth" is shorthand for a few concepts, sometimes referring to the influence of the Holy Ghost which whispers to the mind and heart, sometimes it refers to scriptural references and sometimes it can also refer to instincts.

"Preacheth and edified one another" speaks to having one's words confirmed to the listener by the Holy Ghost.

The final pericope is the insult, and I'll just leave that one be. People are quite capable of understanding without agreeing with the methodology. I shun the commonplace because it shows a lack of effort to impart one's own efforts.

It's not an insult. I'm not accusing you of being a natural man. Rather, the scripture illustrates that things of the Spirit are understood by the Spirit. There are concepts of the gospel that cannot be clinically dissected. I realize that might be hard for you to accept, but it's the way the gospel works.

Originally Posted by Archaea

Once again, you've proven my point, that you, who are probably quite bright, are unwilling to speak your own mind. For once, I'd rather read you reason it out in your own words.

I don't know what you want from me. You want to hear my speak my mind? Do a search on my username. There's plenty there.

By the way, I don't know how any of this ties back into the topic of whether or not a man engaging in homosexual behavior can experience godly joy. The last several posts have really been a useless tangent.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

That's just nonsense.



It's not an insult. I'm not accusing you of being a natural man. Rather, the scripture illustrates that things of the Spirit are understood by the Spirit. There are concepts of the gospel that cannot be clinically dissected. I realize that might be hard for you to accept, but it's the way the gospel works.

The purpose of scripture is manifold, but if one endeavors to prooftext, by saying, the scriptures say "joy" means X, and the scripture are God's word, and are perfect, so any disagreement is not worthy of discussion, then it's a useless exercise.

OTOH, if you use the scriptural reference as a jumping off point from which to initiate description, so that you can say, "here's where the scripture describe X", and then extrapolate in your own words, that could be useful.

Originally Posted by Tex

I don't know what you want from me. You want to hear my speak my mind? Do a search on my username. There's plenty there.

By the way, I don't know how any of this ties back into the topic of whether or not a man engaging in homosexual behavior can experience godly joy. The last several posts have really been a useless tangent.

I wanted you to define joy in your own words, not in the words of the scripture, which are nebulous, feel good descriptions, that persons of common experience can sometimes divine a common meaning.

If you limit your definition of "joy" to the feelings one experienced while being exalted in the celestial kingdom, then gays might fail to experience that. That is beyond my knowledge and experience. If you grant "joy" may encompass feelings less than exaltation, then I'd disagree. You are defining "joy" out of existence into a very limited context.