LDS Freedom Forum

shadow wrote:Yes, God qualifies whom He calls. This includes the laying on of hands. It includes bestowing keys. We can never qualify to successfully fulfill a calling on our own.

I'll take it :ymhug:

Friends now?

Always have been friends, at least from my perspective.

minorityofone wrote: So you seem to be saying doctrine and covenants 121 is wrong, because it clearly states that many are called and the lord does not magically qualify them.

Actually, "magically" is a silly proposition. Although miracles have been known to be likened to it. This is that type of thing. Miraculous, to have the Lord's grace.

minorityofone wrote: In fact it seems to state that most of those called would only suppose they had authority and then amen to their priesthood... So if you read your comment you will see that your comment is way out of harmony with section 121. Not saying I care if you believe section 121 but I am guessing you might...

I am suggesting that you are wresting it. This has nothing to do with my belief or lack.

minorityofone wrote: I am not loyal to any earthly organization if that is what you mean.

I can see that.

minorityofone wrote: If the way was so plain then I imagine you would be able to show me some shred of evidence in the standard works that the lord qualifies someone that he calls, instead of calling someone who has been qualified. Huge difference.

You don't want to accept what I have already shown. That too, is your choice.

minorityofone wrote: Also how is it disputing when I reference your scriptures to support the idea that seers possess and use seer stones? Why don't you just tell me plainly you believe that the leaders of the church are seers because they say so and they know better than the standard works?

Or... You think your personal interpretation of scripture trumps theirs and everybody elses.

minorityofone wrote: I can respect that position but when people won't even admit why they believe what they do, and try to dodge the obvious it is odd.

I haven't dodged anything. I have dealt with you and your charges head on here. I am sorry that you, like everyone else that is into proof texting, has this self-inflated conception that the way that they read the scriptures ought to be the authoritative one. I can quote scriptures too, but I don't see the point. I have done it on this thread. All I can see in you is the fallacy of confirmation bias based on proof-texting, and an inflated sense that your ideology is justifiable, and an enmity toward the Lord's anointed that you and every other person that has ever opposed them, somehow thinks that they can get along in their journey into eternity without them.

minorityofone wrote: If you believe them to be seers while not doing what the scriptures say makes a seer that is your choice and that's really cool but don't say I am disputing when I point out that according to your scriptures they aren't seers because I am pointing out something that is obvious.

It was obvious to self-inflated Nazis that they were the master race too. That didn't make it right. People's perceptions are that they are right, and they don't want to be wrong. I don't see, for example, why this is such an important thing that you don't want to grant to these people to be what the dignity of their office affords to them, when they have done no unrighteousness. What do you have against submission and loyalty to righteous people? How does that hurt you? I submit that it doesn't. Is it that you don't want to play according to the rules of the "system?" If so, then that may explain a lot. What is the real rational basis of your enmity toward them? Because, if there is no rational basis other than enmity toward an establishment, because of flaws in human beings, then it ought to be a given that you would strive to be on the same side as they are, and not invent some other side to be on, that you call the side of "Christ," independent somehow of his servants. If it is enmity toward them because of flaws in human beings, and flaws in how you perceive they run things, then I say, get over it, because they keep the commandments they are given in a flawed way like everybody else. The rub is that they were given commandments and they are striving to keep them, but people happen to perceive flaws in the way they do it. But that was expected. Because Christ used flawed apostles in ancient times just as much, and those men strove to imperfectly keep the commandments they were given too.

minorityofone wrote: If you can give me one good reason to label these men as seers since Joseph smith, besides the fact that they say they are, then I would be curious as to what it is. But if you don't want to discuss it that's cool.

I've already given you argumentation above in other posts. You didn't accept that. I don't see why you would accept this here. I don't know what else you want. Cheers.

How about this missionary mantle that everyone speaks of.

Does a missionary receive a mantle of special power just because they've had someone lay their hands on his head and ordain him?

Does a missionary only receive power from God once he has sufficiently repented and been born of God, and is given power to perform his task?

How many missionaries do you think truly have priesthood power? All of them? Some of them?

The OP mentions problems with beliefs concerning gifts of the Spirit, baptism, Baptism of Fire, Enduring to the end, receiving priesthood power, and until now, nobody has addressed these things that matter most.

There's only been talk about leaders.. again. I never even attacked leaders in the OP, and yet the thread turned to leaders and the defense of leaders.
Why does everything turn to the defense of our leaders, even when a thread isn't even attacking them?

Does anybody have anything to say about the Doctrine of Christ, gifts of the Spirit, and the manner in which we receive priesthood power? Or are our leaders the only important topic?