The Folk Prophet

Dear friends whom with I have now long associated, It is with regret that I have made the difficult decision to abandon this forum. There are a variety of reasons I've made this decision but the primary one is that the More Good Foundation and the progressive, false, mistaken lean of so many of their articles has made me more and more uncomfortable. I am, indeed, deeply uncomfortable with some of them and have considered leaving before accordingly. Deeply, deeply uncomfortable. I have to follow my conscience. I do love the association and the discussion when it is doesn't turn nasty. The times it does turn nasty is the other reason I've made this decision. I've backed way off on my involvement from years past partially because of the nastiness. But part of that, I knew, was my fault, and something I had partial control over. The articles I have no control over. I will check my private messages now and again for a few months. If any of you want to stay in touch otherwise then PM me and we can friend on Facebook or something. But I have simply become too uncomfortable in this particular house to continue dwelling here. And, yes, I am writing this in a snit. I don't expect it will do any good, and many, many more would need to join me in the abandonment before it might do any good -- though I suspect that it might not even then. Apparently the More Good Foundation, without change of leadership, is going to continue down this path. I consider that path highly insidious and destructive. There's been hardly a constructive article written in the past few years. That which isn't harmful tends towards trite and shallow. Because it is difficult for me to leave things hanging and not reply, which would defeat the idea of leaving -- I likely won't read or reply to any comments here in this thread. It is, truly, a difficult thing for me to just walk away. But I feel I need to. And all I can do is that which I feel is right. See you on Facebook if you like. Goodbye, Charles P.S. Those of you who weren't my friends and held no charity or kindness for me -- well...I wish you well too. But regret the parting slightly less, if I'm honest. P.P.S. I'll still be at the get-together at Tucanos and look forward to seeing those of you who are attending.

For those of you who asked for the update, we're having a little boy.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/08/16/ed-smart-elizabeth-smart-father-comes-out-gay-announces-divorce/2027981001/

Shame shame shame shame SHAME on the More Good Foundation for publishing this article. I cannot even begin to express my disappointment. I do believe this may well be the final straw with me. I do not believe I am comfortable being associated to any degree with them any longer. Sister Coppersmith is lying. It is and was nothing but rebellion and pride. She lied to her bishop. She's lying to herself. She's filled with pride and trying to bring others into her pride-based thinking. Those in charge at The More Good Foundation should know better! They should hold their writers to higher standards or truth. Shame on them!

This thread seems designed just to make older people feel guilty. Thanks for nothing.

Technically these two options are not mutually exclusive. One could be suspicious that a kid is making stuff up to get attention and still take them seriously and not ask questions about it actually happening or not.

The scripture plainly says the Father and Son have a body of flesh and bones but the Spirit does not, otherwise He could not dwell within us, and I'm the one with the error in logic? O.......kay. Yeah... Through the Holy Ghost. Yes. But I do very plainly understand the meaning of the words, "were it not so".

I'm not sure how it's unclear. The scriptures teach that the reason the Holy Ghost can dwell in us is because He does not have a body. If that's the scripture truth then it follows that God the Father and Jesus Christ, having bodies, cannot do this, despite whatever knowledge they have. How is this hard to understand?

Let's plan for a high chair just for containment. She's okay without one...but...for civility's sake.

I understand your position. What I want you to explain is how then is it that: "the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us." The clear implication is that the matter is not one of mere knowledge, which renders your position moot.

False. It is His (the Holy Ghost's) special and especial purpose.

Or a very sad day....depending on how one views it. I can't exactly see the scriptures, if being written in our day, saying anything other than something like, "And behold, the people were so corrupt that it was requisite that they did commence mandatory training for the leaders of the church." On the other hand, said scripture could be followed up with something like, "And thus we see that the Lord doth provide for His church." So, yeah. A good day -- but a sad one too.

The difficult situation of not being able to have illicit sex with all the people to whom you're sexually attracted without it being a sin? Boo freakin' hoo.

Me, my wife and my wee one.

This is not hypocrisy.

It's such a weird idea, isn't it, to imply that if someone is viewed as harsh (or as "garbage" as it was put) in their online interactions that they don't deserve respect for trying to be polite in person.

For example, I was shocked the one time I met @estradling75 and he was actually a nice guy!!

My wife and I used to use a lot of pre-workout and/or weight-loss supplements. that we later discovered had green tea. One of them even had "coffee extract". That's something to watch out for in those things as it's quite common.

Essentially he's apparently decided that his personal, carnal self-satisfaction is what the Savior really cares about.

I don't understand a word of this post.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned (a lot to read here) but even if marriage sealing was a "modern" revelation that doesn't mean everyone else couldn't be saved to exaltation. It just means more work in the Millennium.

Animal sacrifice predated Mosaic law.

Without the higher priesthood?

It's not. I'm making the point that I know of no other religion that explicitly teaches that truth about God must be gained through personal revelation. At least I've never come across another one that taught that in order to know if they were the correct church or not one must get on their knees and ask God. If and when another religion claims such, then we'll be talking apples to apples. But Texan's implication that other church's aren't claiming they just figured it out is spurious. The argument that the prophet's got revelation doesn't tell me in any way at all that the prophet actually got that revelation. How do I know they did? Just take their word for it? How do I know the Bible is true? Texan is saying that because some long ago dead people claim they heard the word of God from God that I must, blindly, just accept that -- and, moreover, blindly accept that so-n-so or so-n-so's interpretation of those words is accurate. Why should I accept that the Bible is true instead of a bunch of made up stories? Just because my parent's said so? Just because some Baptist minister says so? Just because some LDS missionary says so? And why should I accept any given church as true? In short, what possible motivation would I have for following the Baptist church, or the Catholic church or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saint? Without personal revelation there is no motivation. There is NO ability to find the truth of God without it. None. Nada.

You misunderstood me. Believing God has revealed truth to the prophets and in the scriptures is different than believing God has spoken directly to you. I'm talking about the latter.