Page 1 of 1
Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:38 am
by iWriteStuff
Who will win this one?
http://www.kivitv.com/news/lds-members- ... ked-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If folks are resigning by the thousands, maybe I'll finally get a pew closer to the front of the chapel.
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:41 am
by ajax
iWriteStuff wrote:Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:44 am
by ajax
iWriteStuff wrote:
If folks are resigning by the thousands, maybe I'll finally get a pew closer to the front of the chapel.
I'm guessing you self describe as a wheat.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:46 am
by iWriteStuff
ajax wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Did you even read the article? The one person they actually interviewed who is resigning is an underage (17y.o.) baptized member with same sex parents who says, for the record:
“It's a basic human need to love, and I could not keep anyone from doing that,” said Negron.
Sounds like a pretty darn good policy to me if folks like him can't abide the idea that God is against homosexual sin/marriage. If gay sex and gay marriage is ok for you, then the church is not.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:47 am
by iWriteStuff
ajax wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:
If folks are resigning by the thousands, maybe I'll finally get a pew closer to the front of the chapel.
I'm guessing you self describe as a wheat.
I self describe as a wheat wannabe. #:-s
The fact that I still attend church while working to resolve doubts and my inherent weaknesses is my main claim to fame.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:54 am
by rewcox
DS and associates were convinced the church would do the abomination of desolation: sealing a gay couple.
Now people are upset the church has a hard stand. Doesn't really matter, those that murmur will continue to murmur over anything the church does. Some even leave the church.
iWriteStuff wrote:Who will win this one?
http://www.kivitv.com/news/lds-members- ... ked-policy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If folks are resigning by the thousands, maybe I'll finally get a pew closer to the front of the chapel.
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:57 am
by ajax
iWriteStuff wrote:ajax wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Did you even read the article? The one person they actually interviewed who is resigning is an underage (17y.o.) baptized member with same sex parents who says, for the record:
“It's a basic human need to love, and I could not keep anyone from doing that,” said Negron.
Sounds like a pretty darn good policy to me if folks like him can't abide the idea that God is against homosexual sin/marriage. If gay sex and gay marriage is ok for you, then the church is not.
Of course I read the article. His reasons aren't the only reasons. But maybe you're right, we don't want to be sullied by "folks like him". He's all of a sudden turned from a valiant youth to "folks like him". Trash. I'm pretty sure he's wrestled enough with his fathers lifestyle, and now has the added burden of dealing with the church who says he must put up against his father or shut up.
And he's right of course. It is a human need to love and be loved. I think it's sad the church pits the kids against their parents in order for the kids to get blessings. A person can be against homosexual relations or marriage or whatever AND against this policy.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 8:57 am
by ajax
rewcox wrote:DS
Obsessive.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 9:06 am
by Mark
ajax wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
That is rich Ajax. On the one hand you come on this site continually to bash and berate the church and its leaderships decisions and are obviously convinced that its current leadership are making these terrible decisions that are totally contrary to the spirit of the gospel of Christ. Yet on the other hand you lament not allowing these innocents the "blessing" of being baptized into what you clearly see now as a corrupted institution no longer valid in the Lords eyes. You are really conflicted here brother. Seek help. :-\
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 9:11 am
by iWriteStuff
ajax wrote:
Of course I read the article. His reasons aren't the only reasons. But maybe you're right, we don't want to be sullied by "folks like him". He's all of a sudden turned from a valiant youth to "folks like him". Trash. I'm pretty sure he's wrestled enough with his fathers lifestyle, and now has the added burden of dealing with the church who says he must put up against his father or shut up.
And he's right of course. It is a human need to love and be loved. I think it's sad the church pits the kids against their parents in order for the kids to get blessings. A person can be against homosexual relations or marriage or whatever AND against this policy.
The policy states they must disavow the PRACTICE of same sex marriage. They can still love their parents just as much as the next teenager. I can disavow the PRACTICE of any kind of sin and still love the sinner. If you can't see the need to disavow a sinful PRACTICE, then gee, I guess sin is ok. But I won't put words in your mouth. You can interpret things as you like.
For example, somehow saying "folks like him" is akin to saying "trash", eh? Not at all what I intended, but thanks for the liberal interpretation. Perhaps I should say "People who self-select to condone sinful behavior and thereby find themselves going contrary to God's commandments". But I'm not a lawyer, don't speak eloquently, and don't possess the mastery of syntax and grammatical expression that folks like you tend to possess. Oops, I used that expression again...
The point is simple: it's a divisive issue with clearly moral implications. Which side will you choose? Do you stand with God and say same sex marriage is wrong or do you condone it? When children can legally decide the issue for themselves, we see folks like the quoted youth who make it apparent why this policy is necessary. He has been taught, and embraced the idea, that same sex marriage is totally fine. Thus he finds himself at odds with the commandments.
Otherwise, big :ymhug: to all, be they gay or straight. Love'm, sure, but teach them the proper doctrine.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 9:24 am
by ajax
Mark wrote:ajax wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against same sex marriage? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
That is rich Ajax.
Thanks Bro. As rich as a hula pie? On the one hand you come on this site continually to bash and berate the church and its leaderships decisions and are obviously convinced that its current leadership are making these terrible decisions that are totally contrary to the spirit of the gospel of Christ. Yet on the other hand you lament not allowing these innocents the "blessing" of being baptized into what you clearly see now as a corrupted institution no longer valid in the Lords eyes. You are really conflicted here brother. Seek help. :-\
I must admit, my interest in the Gospel of Jesus Christ in it's purity skews my opinion. I'm also interested in Mormons. Oxy-moronic maybe? Help me Mark! Help Me!!
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 9:30 am
by ajax
40 And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.
More or less than what?
37 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things.
38 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.
39 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine,
Let God sort out the rest.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 10:13 am
by Mark
ajax wrote:Mark wrote:ajax wrote:
Seriously, could there be any better sifting method than allowing members to state for the record whether they are for or against allowing innocent children and youth blessings? Who's on the Lord's side, who? :ymparty:
That is rich Ajax.
Thanks Bro. As rich as a hula pie? On the one hand you come on this site continually to bash and berate the church and its leaderships decisions and are obviously convinced that its current leadership are making these terrible decisions that are totally contrary to the spirit of the gospel of Christ. Yet on the other hand you lament not allowing these innocents the "blessing" of being baptized into what you clearly see now as a corrupted institution no longer valid in the Lords eyes. You are really conflicted here brother. Seek help. :-\
I must admit, my interest in the Gospel of Jesus Christ in it's purity skews my opinion. I'm also interested in Mormons. Oxy-moronic maybe? Help me Mark! Help Me!!
I've moved from Del Mar so those hula pies are just a fond memory now.
However I discovered trader joes speculoos cookie butter ice cream up here in pebble beach so that void has been filled somewhat. So has the waistline unfortunately.
I would love to help you brother and the best advice I can give to you is to seek the Lords help in removing all the guile and cynical thoughts implanted in your heart that you constantly display in posts toward the Lords true and living church and his servants called to direct its affairs and replace all that pent up cynicism with compassion and forgiveness for any faults you perceive exist in the church. As Robert has spammed over 7000 times you will be glad you did!
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 11:25 am
by ajax
"Prove all things" - Paul
“President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill.” - Apostle Charles W. Penrose, Millennial Star, v. 54, p. 191
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 12:55 pm
by Mark
ajax wrote:"Prove all things" - Paul
“President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill.” - Apostle Charles W. Penrose, Millennial Star, v. 54, p. 191
You asked for my help and I feel compelled to try and give it to you. By all means you should prove all things and investigate them and seek for confirmation of the spirit as so many prophets of the Lord have begged for the saints to do for centuries. However when a person develops a spirit of criticism and faultfinding and accusation he or she has crossed the line of sincere seeking and has become an accuser of the brethren. Joseph said this:
"An individual . . . with . . . [an] abhorrence of evil [joins the Church] . . . . He sets himself upon the watch to detect the failings of others, deeming that he is doing God [a] service in being so employed, and thus is he decoyed into the occupation of the great master of evil, to be the accuser of the brethren. And during the time thus occupied by him, he considers himself actuated by the purest motives, arising from a detestation of sin, . . . . Yet mark the subtlety of Satan in thus leading men into a false position. Such a course, in the first place, probably arose from the purest of motives, and perhaps the individual was instrumental in rectifying some error; he feels a satisfaction in having done so, his self-esteem is gratified, and ere he is aware, he is seeking for another opportunity of doing the same, . . . continually set[ting] himself up as being capable of sitting in judgment upon others, and of rectifying by his own ability the affairs of the kingdom of God.
The eagerness to accuse is from the devil."
This is where I have perceived you and Obrien and several others on this site have crossed that line. You seem so eager to mock or become cynical and accusatory whenever any decision comes from the brethren that appears questionable to you. Rather than seeking to understand and sustain these Brethren in their difficult roles you are always more than willing to put their motives into question and throw barbs at them in your ever so cynical ways.
Joseph also said "False and wicked misrepresentations [by members] . . . have caused thousands to think they were doing God's service when persecuting the children of God." Hugh Nibley observed "The splinter group was another phenomenon that began with the Church itself and is still flourishing. The leaders of such, who go off by themselves to live the gospel in its purity, as they think, have discredited the Church, their cause, by breaking the basic rule on which the Church is founded: "No man has any liberty to lead away people into the wilderness." Are you trying to unite or divide?
Is your heart so pure that you can stand in judgement of these Brethren and declare that their motives are less than pure? Joseph said: "No man is capable of judging a matter, in council, unless his own heart is pure; . . . we frequently are so filled with prejudice, or have a beam in our own eye, that we are not capable of passing right decisions." Is that not exactly what you and others do so often on this forum when you see something the Brethren might do or say that you initially may disagree with? You judge them in critical ways without knowing the first thing about what is in their hearts or what their standing before the Lord is. And you do this all publicly for all to hear. Is that what the Lord through his prophets has taught in his gospel? If you seek to discover the gospel in its pureness perhaps displaying a little charity and compassion for the church and its leadership might be a good place to start.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:07 pm
by ajax
The Brethren are fine. I don't judge them at all. You're conflating a lot of things. I may disagree with policy, but that is the right of the membership. I think the Brethren would be more sustained if we as members took our responsibilities seriously. When I was in leadership, I felt more sustained by persons who questioned than the ones who just nodded.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:13 pm
by Zathura
ajax wrote:rewcox wrote:DS
Obsessive.
+1
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:14 pm
by Zathura
Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:19 pm
by iWriteStuff
Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
Dangit, where's that FacePalm meme when I need it.... Eh, this one will do:
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:22 pm
by rewcox
Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
You were actively being BofM your first year, and was aware of DS. I did see what was going on with DS and group.
Many of them are at remnant sites. Some come back to stir it up.
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:23 pm
by Zathura
iWriteStuff wrote:Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
Dangit, where's that FacePalm meme when I need it.... Eh, this one will do:
haha! :))
Just kidding guys, Rewcox isn't Denver Snuffer..
Or is he?
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:23 pm
by Zathura
rewcox wrote:Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
You were actively being BofM your first year, and was aware of DS. I did see what was going on with DS and group.
Many of them are at remnant sites. Some come back to stir it up.
Explain?
I was actively being BofM my first year? What does this even mean?
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:32 pm
by iWriteStuff
Stahura wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
Dangit, where's that FacePalm meme when I need it.... Eh, this one will do:
haha! :))
Just kidding guys, Rewcox isn't Denver Snuffer..
Or is he?
Will the Real DS please stand up?
And while we're at it, will the real BofR stand up?
Re: Wheat vs. Tares
Posted: November 11th, 2015, 1:33 pm
by Zathura
iWriteStuff wrote:Stahura wrote:iWriteStuff wrote:Stahura wrote:Plot twist, Rewcox IS Denver Snuffer.
Dangit, where's that FacePalm meme when I need it.... Eh, this one will do:
haha! :))
Just kidding guys, Rewcox isn't Denver Snuffer..
Or is he?
Will the Real DS please stand up?
And while we're at it, will the real BofR stand up?
It's me. I'm BofM/BofR