This thread truly frightens me

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I don't know how many time I have heard that if you follow a leader and the leader turns out to be wrong, you will be blessed for it. Think about what that means. This means man is greater than God. You went against God's will because you followed bad advice from a man. Now God is going to reward you for it? That doesn't seems right to me. I doubt God places church management positions above his commandments.

I don't think that's a logical jump.

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Tex's request is somewhat ironic.

Frankly, the LESS material on fallibilty of Church leaders, the better.

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I'm not sure why anyone needs new material. There are two issues, racism and polygamy, where designated prophets of God have spoken out and been completely wrong. These are not small issues. They had significant impact on members' lives and families. There are a thousand smaller issues we could discuss, but if the point we're trying to make is that prophets are fallible (and sometimes in significant ways), I'm not sure why we need to.

I'm not sure I'm in the mood to foster another 300+ thread on prophetic infallibility. Suffice it to say, I think the blacks and the priesthood issue has become the Godwin's Law of Mormon message board obedience discussions. I've said this before.

Anytime someone wants to flaunt prophetic counsel, they cite blacks and the priesthood. Anytime someone wants to push their own pet agenda on church doctrine, they cite blacks and the priesthood.

"The church will someday sanction homosexuality."
"No, they won't."
"Of course they will. Hell, they gave blacks the priesthood!"

It truly cheapens what happened that 1978 summer.

[cougarobgon]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

I don't know how many time I have heard that if you follow a leader and the leader turns out to be wrong, you will be blessed for it. Think about what that means. This means man is greater than God. You went against God's will because you followed bad advice from a man. Now God is going to reward you for it? That doesn't seems right to me. I doubt God places church management positions above his commandments.

I've never heard that, but, I have only been a member of the Church for 30 years...I am sure you heard those comments from well meaning Church members who love and sustain their leaders. During my six years as the local mullah, there were several ward members that did not like me for some things that I expressed over the pulpit or decisions that I made and publicly criticized me for such things...many members came out in my defense, but never once did they defend me by arguing that "if he turns out to be wrong, you will be blessed". Free agency is and will always will be part of the equation.

I don't seem to recall an instance when a Church leader has given me advice and placed it above God's commandments.

Cougarobgon

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm not sure I'm in the mood to foster another 300+ thread on prophetic infallibility. Suffice it to say, I think the blacks and the priesthood issue has become the Godwin's Law of Mormon message board obedience discussions. I've said this before.

Anytime someone wants to flaunt prophetic counsel, they cite blacks and the priesthood. Anytime someone wants to push their own pet agenda on church doctrine, they cite blacks and the priesthood.

"The church will someday sanction homosexuality."
"No, they won't."
"Of course they will. Hell, they gave blacks the priesthood!"

It truly cheapens what happened that 1978 summer.

There's no need to foster another thread because the issue is settled. The reason the racism issue keeps arising is because it's HUGE and it's recent. We could talk about Pres Kimball's counsel on women wearing shorts, but you'd rightfully dismiss that as being fairly insignificant. We could talk about the Adam-God theory, but you'd say that was a long time ago and never really impacted anyone's life. To jay's example, you just respond that it was a fledgling church. Maybe you don't like this example because you can't pull out all the old standbys, so instead we hear "ya got something else?"

We don't need something else.

By the way, I don't think you can use prophet's fallibility to show that the church is absolutely wrong on gay marriage. But it does open the door to the possibility, and effectively counteract exUte's endless imbecilic broken-record "arguments" (to use the term loosely).

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

AingeEraCoug's response was telling.

The seemingly correct LDS and Christian response to such "propoganda" should be along the lines of "this is unfortunate, I respect his right to believe what he wants, hopefully we do not let this issue get in the way of our fellowship one to another...or even a simple "I disagree with this brother."

Instead, Ainge says, "He deserves to get in trouble."

Get in trouble? Are we in a police state? Is the concern in our congregations that the lost sheep get their just punishments or that they come back to the fold?

His was the most revolting of all responses, I thought. It betrays a total disregard for truth and accuracy, in favor of toeing the line - and it's a fictional line, because the email wasn't from any of the brethren - it was nothing but political propaganda.

Why are mormons so afraid of truth? It is anathema to question anything related to the church - it's seen as a betrayal of your testimony to even question. When did this become such a significant belief?

And I would say it's even a legitimate issue whether I'm seeing more than is actually there. Not just on CB, but I believe I see that mindset as being common among church members - heck, I was even taught a lot of that by my parents.

Are mormons afraid of truth that might contradict their beliefs?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

There's no need to foster another thread because the issue is settled. The reason the racism issue keeps arising is because it's HUGE and it's recent. We could talk about Pres Kimball's counsel on women wearing shorts, but you'd rightfully dismiss that as being fairly insignificant. We could talk about the Adam-God theory, but you'd say that was a long time ago and never really impacted anyone's life. To jay's example, you just respond that it was a fledgling church. Maybe you don't like this example because you can't pull out all the old standbys, so instead we hear "ya got something else?"

We don't need something else.

By the way, I don't think you can use prophet's fallibility to show that the church is absolutely wrong on gay marriage. But it does open the door to the possibility, and effectively counteract exUte's endless imbecilic broken-record "arguments" (to use the term loosely).

In other words, the examples that exist are just not that convincing, but you don't have anything else. So you go with the best you have.

Over and over and over and over.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

In other words, the examples that exist are just not that convincing, but you don't have anything else. So you go with the best you have.

Over and over and over and over.

Wait, are you talking about the Yes on Prop 8 pamphlets?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

Over and over and over and over.

but in my heart, it was so real...

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Tex

In other words, the examples that exist are just not that convincing, but you don't have anything else. So you go with the best you have.

Over and over and over and over.

Right...the one (or really, two) that remains uncontested.

I'm not saying your other responses are legitimate. It's just that this one so easily settles the issue. It is kind of sad that we have to remind you of a basic principle...over and over and over.

[cougarobgon]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

...

Why are mormons so afraid of truth? It is anathema to question anything related to the church - it's seen as a betrayal of your testimony to even question. When did this become such a significant belief?

And I would say it's even a legitimate issue whether I'm seeing more than is actually there. Not just on CB, but I believe I see that mindset as being common among church members - heck, I was even taught a lot of that by my parents.

Are mormons afraid of truth that might contradict their beliefs?

Why are mormons so afraid of truth?

I am Mormon and I am not afraid to hear you express what you believe to be true. Whether or not I accept it and argue with you about it is a different story.

It is anathema to question anything related to the church - it's seen as a betrayal of your testimony to even question. When did this become such a significant belief?

I question many things and I never feel I am betraying my testimony. I listen to the advice or counsel and if I believe it will uplift me and make me a better person, I follow it.

And I would say it's even a legitimate issue whether I'm seeing more than is actually there. Not just on CB, but I believe I see that mindset as being common among church members - heck, I was even taught a lot of that by my parents.

During my 30 year Church membership I have only resided in 7 different wards, not counting the areas during my 18 month mission. The mindset you profess exists was not common in those wards. I find that the diversity of membership from the hardliners to the liberals is an interesting spectrum that makes the Church a force to be reckon with and made/makes it enjoyable for me to attend Church.

Are mormons afraid of truth that might contradict their beliefs?
Again, I am not afraid to hear you express what you believe to be true. Whether or not I accept it...is a different story.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by jay santos

but in my heart, it was so real...

Tex can feel the soil falling over his head as Nov 4 draws nearer.

Oh, well....enough said.