Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
The whole point of my post is to help these people understand.5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 2:59 pmThe "True and Living Savior" post was just posted yesterday and your comment just 24 hours later. I don't think that comparing likes on two different forum posts posted at different times is a good way to judge the hearts of people. A single person's experience is also not proof of anything except. I get that this is a forum and there are some extreme viewpoints in here but I have to point out, not based on your heart, but your words, that these words are in error.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 9:56 amYou guys might not say you view Russell M Nelson in "a god-like" way, but everything about your posts and actions says otherwise.jmack wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 9:29 amThere have been some leaders who taught precepts of men, but the course was righted, because this is the Lord's church and he's got other leaders who pray and listen to know his will. But the group who thinks that all LDS prophets(except for Joseph ) are arms of flesh need to be countered because they are the ones leading others astray and away from the Lord's church. I love that scripture, great find! You're so right, Nephi was aware some just want to be followers and want someone else to do the work, Moses dealt with that same problem. The point I make is that we not reject the Lord's true prophets because there are some false ones and we don't want to be tricked.Hosh4710 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 8:58 am
I think he can be referring to both. I'm not the one limiting the scope of who he is referring to here. Arm of flesh is arm of flesh. Leaders are not exempt. Nephi was not exempt. I believe he understood this principle well.
55 And now, they said: We know of a surety that the Lord is with thee, for we know that it is the power of the Lord that has shaken us. And they fell down before me, and were about to worship me, but I would not suffer them, saying: I am thy brother, yea, even thy younger brother [I am not God, I am still flesh]; wherefore, worship the Lord thy God...
You guys talk about Nelson more than Jesus, you frequently have agitated knee-jerk reactions to people that say something that MAYBE in some universe SOMEWHERE might be construed as a knock on Nelson.
In addition to that, you guys "liked" a post praising our Beloved prophet, but when given the opportunity to "like" a near-identical post praising our Savior, where are you alll at? Nowhere to be found.
Say what you guys want, your actions say otherwise, and this has largely been my experience with the church. You all clearly have a bigger attachment to President Nelson than you realize.
Of those that "liked" the post about our "True and Living Prophet", ZERO "liked" the post about our "True and Living Savior". NONE OF YOU. If you don't think that this could POSSIBLY show an underlying, sub-conscience truth about where your heart MIGHT POSSIBLY BE and what your testimony is POSSIBLY founded on, I don't know what to tell you
This is why people are saying what they're saying. It's consistent across the board. Each chance you all get to show, even in small ways, that Jesus takes priority over the President of the Church, you don't take the chance. Time and time and time again it appears that clearly The President of the Church is the center of our Religion, and not Jesus. Those who are near-obsessive about defending and honoring the beloved prophet almost never like or participate in similar threads about the Savior.
It's disappointing, but not surprising. I knew this would be the case.
Now, this post will trigger you, you'll be upset that we are insisting that you worship the prophet and the cycle repeats itself. Fun stuff. I'm not saying you worship the prophet, I'm saying that the message that you and those like you broadcast LOUD AND CLEAR to myself and investigators is that the President of the Church is the center of the church, he cannot be criticized, he cannot be wrong, and those who disagree should be belittled and called names and cast out of the church. Not a good look.
Like I saw in a sermon the other day, I ride with Jesus.
When you say things like "you guys" and "you all" you are acting like a collectivist that views people not as individuals but as groups. This is the same thing that many do with race and it is a logical fallacy. The things you are accusing everyone of certainly do not apply to me personally and I would argue that many here would take issue with your characterizations.
The president of the church is not the center of the religion. He is the topic of discussion recently because there have been many significant changes under his leadership that affect the lives of the members so of course people are going to talk about it. This doesn't mean that members elevate him or any leaders above Jesus and such a claim is ridiculous. If there is anyone who does literally believe that the aged doctor, Russell Nelson is above Jesus, I'd be interested to hear their reasoning.
Personally, I don't believe that any mortal is above criticism and those that have criticisms have every right to voice them. I think we should be careful about how we frame our arguments and make sure we are being intellectually honest. You cannot judge a person's heart through text in forum posts, only their words.
I've been on this forum for over 10 years and have been involved in many great posts about the Savior and the gospel. Posts about Nelson have only been around as long as he has been president and most involve the recent changes, which is to be expected.
With all due respect, to suddenly accuse everyone here and the church as a whole as putting Nelson above the Savior shows a very limited view at best.
Goodness.Lizzy60 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:21 pm Check out Deseret Bookstore at City Creek Center. Then tell me who we laud, honor, revere, etc.
https://blog.deseretbook.com/news/2019/ ... -artifacts
Comparing likes on posts doesn't mean anything. In a 24 hour period when a post goes up it can get quickly buried and even if people engage in one post vs. another doesn't indicate how they feel about something. Your logic is not sound. I didn't engage either post, what does that mean? It means nothing. My personal relationship with God is one thing, and the types of topics I engage in on a specific forum is another.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:10 pm I stated how long after it was created. It has now been up as long as the prophet post was up when it had 10 likes. Many of those who participated and supported that thread have been active on the forum since the post about the Savior was created.
Their actions show a subconscious need to cleave to this mortal man every chance they get while at the same time overlooking a near identical post praising Jesus Christ. Inexcusable .
None of those people care to support similar posts about the Savior like they do about their beloved prophet. I’ve got nothing else to say, their actions, both the ones they make and the ones they don’t speak for them. If this can’t help them understand why people accuse them of worshipping the prophet then nothing’s going to help them.
With all due respect, it saddens me that you defend this behavior. There is more focus on the prophet than on the Savior.
Look at the church website, visit a random sacrament testimony meeting, go try and convince my many investigators otherwise. They couldn’t comprehend why they heard nothing of Jesus and only of This “beloved prophet”
It’d inexcusable to refuse to admit that this occurs and that it’s an issue. Inexcusable .
What a pointless debate. No data is collected on this information , so there’s no data to support either argument. You can’t prove that sacrament meetings are all about Jesus and they talk about him more than Nelson with data.5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:26 pmComparing likes on posts doesn't mean anything. In a 24 hour period when a post goes up it can get quickly buried and even if people engage in one post vs. another doesn't indicate how they feel about something. Your logic is not sound. I didn't engage either post, what does that mean? It means nothing. My personal relationship with God is one thing, and the types of topics I engage in on a specific forum is another.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:10 pm I stated how long after it was created. It has now been up as long as the prophet post was up when it had 10 likes. Many of those who participated and supported that thread have been active on the forum since the post about the Savior was created.
Their actions show a subconscious need to cleave to this mortal man every chance they get while at the same time overlooking a near identical post praising Jesus Christ. Inexcusable .
None of those people care to support similar posts about the Savior like they do about their beloved prophet. I’ve got nothing else to say, their actions, both the ones they make and the ones they don’t speak for them. If this can’t help them understand why people accuse them of worshipping the prophet then nothing’s going to help them.
With all due respect, it saddens me that you defend this behavior. There is more focus on the prophet than on the Savior.
Look at the church website, visit a random sacrament testimony meeting, go try and convince my many investigators otherwise. They couldn’t comprehend why they heard nothing of Jesus and only of This “beloved prophet”
It’d inexcusable to refuse to admit that this occurs and that it’s an issue. Inexcusable .
Our entire sacrament meeting is about Jesus Christ, the whole ordinance of the sacrament. Last Sunday I spoke on the principles of faith, oneness, and sacrifice. Nelson isn't mentioned every Sunday in every single meeting.
It is inexcusable to parade a strawman around and be hyper-focused on a non-issue. It is also a complete joke to say that people come to our church and hear "nothing" of Jesus. We've been studying the New Testament all year long and every lesson has been about Jesus, the sacrament is about Jesus, and most of the talks involve Jesus or his principles and teachings. "Nothing" is a specific word with specific meaning.
You cannot judge the entire world because of your own experiences. If you want to judge the world, let's see all of your data on all of the sacrament meeting talks worldwide and a word print analysis of each statement so we can verify your conclusions. Let's also see your statements from your "many investigators" regarding the complete absence of mentions of Jesus and "only" statements about Pres. Nelson.
If you cannot provide such information, you are breaking one of the ten commandments that says "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor."
Desert Book is a commercial property, it's a book store. They sell books about things that people are interested in reading about. One of those topics is the president of the church. I have never personally purchased any of these kinds of books because I'm not really interested in them. I'm sure each of the leaders of the church has interesting and amazing stories, but so do the members of my ward.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:24 pmGoodness.Lizzy60 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:21 pm Check out Deseret Bookstore at City Creek Center. Then tell me who we laud, honor, revere, etc.
https://blog.deseretbook.com/news/2019/ ... -artifacts
Nothing to see here folks.......
It's not pointless, you are using words like "all" and are accusing everyone and are painting a picture that is farcical. If you don't have the data, then don't make the claims. I can prove that every sacrament meeting is about Jesus because the sacrament is offered in every meeting except for stake and general conferences. That's the whole point of being there. The talks and music, on the other hand, can be about other things or different topics or themes. They might be faith, they might be marriage, they might be the restoration, they aren't all exactly the same thing every week which means they are not also all about Pres. Nelson every week.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:32 pm What a pointless debate. No data is collected on this information , so there’s no data to support either argument. You can’t prove that sacrament meetings are all about Jesus and they talk about him more than Nelson with data.
It’s obviously not my personal experience, the whole reason I’m posting is because of complaints that they are constantly being accused of this by a multitude of people. We aren’t outliers, we aren’t apostate. We are the same thing.
Ignore it if you want, at the least do us all a favor please stop acting surprised and acting like you don’t understand why you’re being accused of it when you just reject the explanations that people give.
I understand what you're saying, my only response is that I'm not intending "condemnation of all people".5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:38 pmDesert Book is a commercial property, it's a book store. They sell books about things that people are interested in reading about. One of those topics is the president of the church. I have never personally purchased any of these kinds of books because I'm not really interested in them. I'm sure each of the leaders of the church has interesting and amazing stories, but so do the members of my ward.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:24 pmGoodness.Lizzy60 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:21 pm Check out Deseret Bookstore at City Creek Center. Then tell me who we laud, honor, revere, etc.
https://blog.deseretbook.com/news/2019/ ... -artifacts
Nothing to see here folks.......
Pres. Nelson was never one of my favorite apostles, frankly, he was pretty low on my list. I'm not saying that to be mean, just truthful. I think his leadership has been surprisingly good, however, and I like the direction of things at the moment.
One thing I have never liked is a cult of personality that exists around the office of the president. I would agree with you that there is one and it has existed since about McKay when we started calling the president "the prophet." I've never called Nelson that because I don't believe "prophet" is a title, he is the president. We sustain 15 men that we consent to act in the capacity of prophets, seers, and revelators for the collective church membership. But as Joseph said, "a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such."
I don't mind books about Nelson. If people want to write them and read them, that is fine. I don't like these church-sponsored birthday bashes for the president of the church though. I do not like the term "beloved" that gets applied to the president, but that is up to the person saying it and what they mean by it.
I am completely aware than there are elements of a potentially dangerous cult of personality around the president which I think is kind of a human nature thing to do. I think some of the apostles wittingly or unwittingly contribute to it.
But where I draw the line is the total condemnation of all people and escalating this issue to be a bigger problem than it is. If you are going to talk about an issue and be taken seriously, I would suggest being proportional in your statements. When you are vastly out of proportion, grasping at any straw, then you will get people like me pointing it out.
I actually follow your blog on a regular basis believe it or not. I'll just direct you to my last post.5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:48 pmIt's not pointless, you are using words like "all" and are accusing everyone and are painting a picture that is farcical. If you don't have the data, then don't make the claims. I can prove that every sacrament meeting is about Jesus because the sacrament is offered in every meeting except for stake and general conferences. That's the whole point of being there. The talks and music, on the other hand, can be about other things or different topics or themes. They might be faith, they might be marriage, they might be the restoration, they aren't all exactly the same thing every week which means they are not also all about Pres. Nelson every week.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:32 pm What a pointless debate. No data is collected on this information , so there’s no data to support either argument. You can’t prove that sacrament meetings are all about Jesus and they talk about him more than Nelson with data.
It’s obviously not my personal experience, the whole reason I’m posting is because of complaints that they are constantly being accused of this by a multitude of people. We aren’t outliers, we aren’t apostate. We are the same thing.
Ignore it if you want, at the least do us all a favor please stop acting surprised and acting like you don’t understand why you’re being accused of it when you just reject the explanations that people give.
I never said you or anyone else was an outlier or an apostate, I am addressing your words and claims which are incorrect and you don't have the data to support them. I'm not acting surprised and I reject your accusations against me personally because I know they are not correct and that you do not know me, my heart, or my mind. If you would like some data, I can refer you to my blog which I have contributed to over the last decade.
http://oneclimbs.com/topics/
You'll notice only one post out of over 600 that has a tag for "Russell M. Nelson." And the only reason I had a post about him was that I was writing a post about every conference talk and he gave the opening remarks. Take a look at the other tags and see what else I've been posting about.
If you want to talk about a problem or issue, do it in proportion. When you act like a collectivist and seek to paint everyone with the same brush, they stop listening because if you can't even get your premise factual then nobody is going to believe anything else you have to say.
So this is a very well explained post. I noticed on the initial post I was commenting on that you were mentioning others the thread but your words, whether unintentionally or no, were taking in "the church" which is a larger scope and one that I am included in. I also did not think that your premise of weighing likes on two different posts was a valid argument.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:50 pm I understand what you're saying, my only response is that I'm not intending "condemnation of all people".
I am among those that supports Russell M Nelson, I sustain him.I have defended him, I have defended his decision to fly to New Zealand and meet with the NAACP, among other things.
I'm not condemning every Mormon, or everyone that sustains the prophet. I don't like when the same thing is done to so-called "Apostates" and they are painted with the same brush. I'm not trying to do that.
I'm not actually condemning anyone. The people I was addressing are those who directly spoke to me, or those like me at one time or another, and complained about constantly being criticized and accused of worshiping the prophet. I'm trying to give a very low level, detailed explanation as to why people might think that they worship the prophet.
I cannot know their hearts, but I can see their actions and their words and thus it's my suggestion that they evaluate the situation because given their actions and words, it's apparent to many people that there's an emphasis on the prophet that shouldn't be there. . It's a POSSIBILITY that there might be something going on , that's as far as I'll ever go. I can't know their hearts, I never will.
I"m with you 100% in this most recent post.
Yes , Deseret Book is a business. They do what they do to maximize profit, to reach as many of their consumers as they can. The actions that Deseret Book take can show SOMETHING about their intended audience, can't it? Even just a little?5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 3:38 pm
Desert Book is a commercial property, it's a book store. They sell books about things that people are interested in reading about. One of those topics is the president of the church. I have never personally purchased any of these kinds of books because I'm not really interested in them. I'm sure each of the leaders of the church has interesting and amazing stories, but so do the members of my ward.
This makes sense to me. Got it5tev3 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 4:02 pm
I think that before casting judgment if you have a suspicion, it is a good idea to first ask a person respectfully what they mean by their statements. You can then push a little further and see if your theories are validated by their own expressions and then it become easy and just to criticize those expressions. When you create a strawman and put it in someone's mouth and have them saying and believing things they wouldn't agree with, you will boost your ego but not win anyone to your side.
Yes, they are a business and produce products that they think they can make a profit off of. I don't think, however, that someone purchasing a book about Pres. Nelson means they elevate him to a status above the Savior or worship him. I've studied "Mein Kampf" for historical reasons, not because I admire Hitler or national socialism.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 4:03 pm Yes , Deseret Book is a business. They do what they do to maximize profit, to reach as many of their consumers as they can. The actions that Deseret Book take can show SOMETHING about their intended audience, can't it? Even just a little?
I don't think It's irrelevant to point out the display at Deseret Book. It's led by LDS people, it employs LDS people, and I'm sure almost all if it's consumers are LDS. Their emphasis on the prophet is yet another example that this is not a non-problem. There are examples and experiences everywhere that show that clearly, many of the LDS faith have an emphasis on the prophet that puts others off.
I've been in Bishops offices with pictures of the First Presidency while a picture of Jesus was nowhere to be found. Like I've said, I lost many investigators, families of investigators because they were so bothered after Fast and Testimony meeting. There were those that stuck through sacrament , just to be taught about the "living prophet" in gospel principles. I have family members, a sibling, friends growing up, friends that I have now, co-workers who are overzealous regarding the prophet. They admit they never read the scriptures, they have a poor knowledge of the Book of Mormon stories, they couldn't tell you where any scriptures are, they are not passionate about the gospel EXCEPT when it comes to the President of the Church. They suddenly become emotional when praising him, angry when defending him. This is not my personal experience, this same experience has been shared on this forum and on blogs and podcasts by soooo many people. I want the church to improve. I want Zion. I want us all to become one, and it simply won't happen until unbelief is shed. Testimonies must not be built on the Prophet. More need that spiritual rebirth, as President Benson testified and yearned for.
God bless our current leaders for changing the curriculum and focusing on the New Testament. If I had Come Follow Me on my mission, there would have been more people that would make the decision to be baptized and confirmed.
I would advise not to second guess the playbook/strategy employed by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. They certainly haven't stood idly by, watching this sin infiltrate our society and the church itself. Perhaps their reiteration of the family proclamation and similar "quiet" beckoning to repent and remain morally pure are exactly how The Lord wants them to tread at this moment in history.[email protected] wrote: ↑July 21st, 2019, 1:35 amThis is a very interesting point and it's one thing that is contributing to my weakening faith in the the Church. Not in God the Father, Christ, the scriptures or Joseph Smith but in the current Church and it's leadership.mike_rumble wrote: ↑July 19th, 2019, 10:22 am Readers may wonder why members are becoming inactive or leaving altogether, but it's not so hard to understand when these things happen and there is only silence from the Authorities of the Church. Is it enough to just make positive statements on morality without an equal condemnation of specific acts of immorality? I don't think so, in my opinion anyway.
For years we've been brow beaten with how bad and harmful pornography is and I agree it is harmful and it is a sinful vice that should be avoided. But we don't hear anything about how harmful and sinful homosexuality is, or feminism and sexular humanism are and the associated activism are. I mean what gives? Is it because the latter things are protected and promoted by big government and big business? And God's Church and anointed ones fear them? It's not right. This "new direction" the Church has been taking the last few years and especially under Nelson I just can't enthusiastically support. It's just not the Church I grew up with in the 90s and early 2000s and it's shocking to see things go down hill so fast.
I'm sorry I said yahoo, I was trying to choose something that wouldn't be offensive, which would get censored, but that didn't work. I never idolized them and I think the apostles should not encourage it. But we don't treat them like the pope, we're not to that point. I think some maybe see themselves in others and so they despise them for it. I do get frustrated because I feel like I'm outnumbered there are a lot more on the other side from mine of every argument but I'll try to do better.Hosh4710 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 9:36 amI'm sorry should I use a different term than God-like? Maybe celebrity-like? Do we not reverence our leaders in a similar way that the Catholics do the pope? Can you really not see this? Why do you feel the need to call people names? I feel like alot of the mainstream members on this site get so riled up and you call us all kinds of names. I am not judging you. I am pointing out a tradition that I disagree with. Why can't this be a discussion. Not everyone who disagrees with your view is a Yahoo, wacko, nincapoop. I'm not making assumptions, I'm stating an observation that I've made after spending a lifetime in the church. I was guilty of putting leaders on a pedestal, and I believe most do this unaware. It's idol worship.jmack wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 8:52 amYou are making an assumption about how other members view leaders. It might be true of a small group, but it's false about the majority. We don't give them god-like status, that's you talking. News flash; God sends Prophets to lead and guide us and he isn't happy when some yahoo accuses his righteous, duly called servants of being the arm of flesh we're warned to not follow.Hosh4710 wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2019, 4:39 pmNo your absolutely right. It can be men in Babylon, it could be men from other churches, it could be men from the moon for all I care. What gets me is how members view leaders as if they have some God-like status that exempts them from being the arm of flesh. They are included in this warning. They are men. You have to be able to prove that they are speaking by the power of the Holy Ghost 100% of the time for them to be not included in Nephis description.gangbusters wrote: ↑July 22nd, 2019, 4:19 pm
Again, let me know if I misstate your position. You're saying that Nephi's statement "they are led, that in many instances they do err because they are taught by the precepts of men," refers to prophets and apostles, or perhaps that it can? Is that correct? So a prophet of God is cautioning against people relying on the teachings of other prophets and apostles?
You don't think that "precepts of men" refers to precepts of the world; IE precepts not of God but of Babylon? I'd love your thoughts on my questions.
Oh really? You mean all those times they have stated officially that homosexuality of the heart and mind is not a sin, but homosexuality in physical action is?LDS Physician wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 8:37 amThey certainly haven't stood idly by, watching this sin infiltrate our society and the church itself.[email protected] wrote: ↑July 21st, 2019, 1:35 amThis is a very interesting point and it's one thing that is contributing to my weakening faith in the the Church. Not in God the Father, Christ, the scriptures or Joseph Smith but in the current Church and it's leadership.mike_rumble wrote: ↑July 19th, 2019, 10:22 am Readers may wonder why members are becoming inactive or leaving altogether, but it's not so hard to understand when these things happen and there is only silence from the Authorities of the Church. Is it enough to just make positive statements on morality without an equal condemnation of specific acts of immorality? I don't think so, in my opinion anyway.
For years we've been brow beaten with how bad and harmful pornography is and I agree it is harmful and it is a sinful vice that should be avoided. But we don't hear anything about how harmful and sinful homosexuality is, or feminism and sexular humanism are and the associated activism are. I mean what gives? Is it because the latter things are protected and promoted by big government and big business? And God's Church and anointed ones fear them? It's not right. This "new direction" the Church has been taking the last few years and especially under Nelson I just can't enthusiastically support. It's just not the Church I grew up with in the 90s and early 2000s and it's shocking to see things go down hill so fast.
Sounds more like:As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
I haven't looked at a thread about the Savior, so I couldn't give any likes. Sometimes I don't have time to follow any but ones ive posted on. I think you're making unfair judgments without knowing the facts. I love the Savior and try to serve him. I think President Nelson loves the Savior and tries to get us to follow him. The church is Jesus Christ's and not Pres Nelsons.Stahura wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 9:56 amYou guys might not say you view Russell M Nelson in "a god-like" way, but everything about your posts and actions says otherwise.jmack wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 9:29 amThere have been some leaders who taught precepts of men, but the course was righted, because this is the Lord's church and he's got other leaders who pray and listen to know his will. But the group who thinks that all LDS prophets(except for Joseph ) are arms of flesh need to be countered because they are the ones leading others astray and away from the Lord's church. I love that scripture, great find! You're so right, Nephi was aware some just want to be followers and want someone else to do the work, Moses dealt with that same problem. The point I make is that we not reject the Lord's true prophets because there are some false ones and we don't want to be tricked.Hosh4710 wrote: ↑July 23rd, 2019, 8:58 amI think he can be referring to both. I'm not the one limiting the scope of who he is referring to here. Arm of flesh is arm of flesh. Leaders are not exempt. Nephi was not exempt. I believe he understood this principle well.
55 And now, they said: We know of a surety that the Lord is with thee, for we know that it is the power of the Lord that has shaken us. And they fell down before me, and were about to worship me, but I would not suffer them, saying: I am thy brother, yea, even thy younger brother [I am not God, I am still flesh]; wherefore, worship the Lord thy God...
You guys talk about Nelson more than Jesus, you frequently have agitated knee-jerk reactions to people that say something that MAYBE in some universe SOMEWHERE might be construed as a knock on Nelson.
In addition to that, you guys "liked" a post praising our Beloved prophet, but when given the opportunity to "like" a near-identical post praising our Savior, where are you alll at? Nowhere to be found.
Say what you guys want, your actions say otherwise, and this has largely been my experience with the church. You all clearly have a bigger attachment to President Nelson than you realize.
Of those that "liked" the post about our "True and Living Prophet", ZERO "liked" the post about our "True and Living Savior". NONE OF YOU. If you don't think that this could POSSIBLY show an underlying, sub-conscience truth about where your heart MIGHT POSSIBLY BE and what your testimony is POSSIBLY founded on, I don't know what to tell you
This is why people are saying what they're saying. It's consistent across the board. Each chance you all get to show, even in small ways, that Jesus takes priority over the President of the Church, you don't take the chance. Time and time and time again it appears that clearly The President of the Church is the center of our Religion, and not Jesus. Those who are near-obsessive about defending and honoring the beloved prophet almost never like or participate in similar threads about the Savior.
It's disappointing, but not surprising. I knew this would be the case.
Now, this post will trigger you, you'll be upset that we are insisting that you worship the prophet and the cycle repeats itself. Fun stuff. I'm not saying you worship the prophet, I'm saying that the message that you and those like you broadcast LOUD AND CLEAR to myself and investigators is that the President of the Church is the center of the church, he cannot be criticized, he cannot be wrong, and those who disagree should be belittled and called names and cast out of the church. Not a good look.
Like I saw in a sermon the other day, I ride with Jesus.
Your sarcasm, anger, and malice make clear who's voice you are following.concierge wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 11:35 amOh really? You mean all those times they have stated officially that homosexuality of the heart and mind is not a sin, but homosexuality in physical action is?LDS Physician wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 8:37 amThey certainly haven't stood idly by, watching this sin infiltrate our society and the church itself.[email protected] wrote: ↑July 21st, 2019, 1:35 amThis is a very interesting point and it's one thing that is contributing to my weakening faith in the the Church. Not in God the Father, Christ, the scriptures or Joseph Smith but in the current Church and it's leadership.mike_rumble wrote: ↑July 19th, 2019, 10:22 am Readers may wonder why members are becoming inactive or leaving altogether, but it's not so hard to understand when these things happen and there is only silence from the Authorities of the Church. Is it enough to just make positive statements on morality without an equal condemnation of specific acts of immorality? I don't think so, in my opinion anyway.
For years we've been brow beaten with how bad and harmful pornography is and I agree it is harmful and it is a sinful vice that should be avoided. But we don't hear anything about how harmful and sinful homosexuality is, or feminism and sexular humanism are and the associated activism are. I mean what gives? Is it because the latter things are protected and promoted by big government and big business? And God's Church and anointed ones fear them? It's not right. This "new direction" the Church has been taking the last few years and especially under Nelson I just can't enthusiastically support. It's just not the Church I grew up with in the 90s and early 2000s and it's shocking to see things go down hill so fast.
No you are right, they haven't stood idly by-they've welcomed it right on in!
It's cool man, I can't wait till we apply the same standard to other sin-oops not sins now. Like how Christ said we aren't to be angry with our brother-nah throw that out the window.
It's okay to have anger, wrath, malice towards our fellow men . .. . just don't "act on it" b/c THEN it becomes a "sin".
It's okay to thoughts and feelings about stealing something . . .just don't "act on it" b/c THEN it becomes a "sin".
It's totally okay to have sexual desire and attraction towards my neighbors wife . . . .just don't "act on it" b/c THEN it becomes a "sin".
It's not a sin b/c I was "born that way". I was "born" that way to have anger, malice, wrath towards my neighbor.
I was "born" that way to have the desires and emotional feelings of taking what it's mine.
I was "born" that way to have the desire and feelings to want my neighbor's wife.
I can't wait until this new "Gospel" becomes preached throughout all the land.
No, they are preaching an anti-Christ message and it's really sad.
You know what "born that way" is called in the scriptures? The natural man.
And our leaders are preaching that it's okay to indulge in the natural man in thoughts and feelings, just don't act on it.
It's sick, perverted and completely against Christ.Sounds more like:As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.
As for me and my house, we will serve the Church right or wrong.
This issue is a very simple one.
Do you fundamentally believe that through Christ and His Atonement that a man (or woman) can fundamentally change who they are?
I believe He can fundamentally change an individuals desires, heart, thoughts and feelings-whatever it may be. It is the whole promise of becoming "born again" or becoming a "new man" in Christ.
The Church has, unfortunately, completely given up on Christ's actual power to fundamentally change the inner parts of someone-which means as an organization it's lost Faith in the Being in whom it proclaims is at it's head.
Real, dang sad.
Lizzy60 wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 2:03 pm Perhaps I need to ask my closing question again. We ALL have to overcome the natural man. We ALL need to overcome any DESIRE to sin. So why is an exception being made for homosexuals, by our Apostles, teaching that same-sex ATTRACTION (the desire to have sex with a same-gender person) is NOT a sin?
Quote:
Your sarcasm, anger, and malice make clear whose voice you are following.
---------------------
That's typical. Instead of addressing the obvious truth about how LDS leadership at the apostle level have caved to the Gay Agenda, stating that being attracted (lustful thoughts) to the same sex is not a sin, and that identifying as gay or lesbian is not a sin (as a man thinketh no longer applies, I guess) and even stating that LDS members are free to support legal gay marriage without their temple recommends being in jeopardy (Christofferson 2015) ----- instead you accuse the person stating these facts as following Satan's voice.
I think you have something backwards. Who do you think is rejoicing when an apostle says it's fine and dandy to support bay marriage on one's social media accounts? Who do you think is laughing when an apostle says that desiring to have sex with one's same gender and announcing to the world that one is gay or lesbian? As a man thinketh, so is he. Or, are we just throwing out scriptures we don't like, as thou shall not covet, or looking on someone lustfully is committing adultery in ones heart? There is not a gay person in this world who has not had lustful thoughts and fantasies about a same-sex encounter, but we have apostles telling them that's NOT a problem. Just keep the thoughts inside and don't act on them and you're good to go (on a mission, to the temple, etc)
We all have to overcome the natural man, and put away any desire to sin. Why is an exception being made for the homosexuals? Why are they special?
Some of you, including church leaders, are anti-scriptural when you teach that our impure thoughts are NOT sinful. It's not us accusing them, it's us teaching what the scriptures teach. Thou shalt not covet. To lust after a woman is committing adultery in one's heart.jmack wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 5:18 pm Some of us, including church leaders don't think someone should be accused of sin when they don't act on it. I sure hope those of you who accuse a person with ssa who chooses not to follow through are very careful to banish all wrong thoughts from your mind, since you will be judged for them. Jesus said you'll be judged by the standard you judged others so good luck with that.
Having sexhal thoughts is not impure, they are natural urges given by God. If you aren't gay, I don't think you can judge someone who is and claim their sexual attracton is made up. You will be judged by the standard you use to judge others, just remember that.Lizzy60 wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 5:46 pmSome of you, including church leaders, are anti-scriptural when you teach that our impure thoughts are NOT sinful. It's not us accusing them, it's us teaching what the scriptures teach. Thou shalt not covet. To lust after a woman is committing adultery in one's heart.jmack wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 5:18 pm Some of us, including church leaders don't think someone should be accused of sin when they don't act on it. I sure hope those of you who accuse a person with ssa who chooses not to follow through are very careful to banish all wrong thoughts from your mind, since you will be judged for them. Jesus said you'll be judged by the standard you judged others so good luck with that.
Wrong.jmack wrote: ↑July 24th, 2019, 5:18 pm Some of us, including church leaders don't think someone should be accused of sin when they don't act on it. I sure hope those of you who accuse a person with ssa who chooses not to follow through are very careful to banish all wrong thoughts from your mind, since you will be judged for them. Jesus said you'll be judged by the standard you judged others so good luck with that.