The Folk Prophet

How is it that we preach leaving judgement to God but then feel comfortable judging someone? Saying someone isn't going to hell is just as judgmental as saying someone is. I say we leave such judgment to God...good and bad...righteousness and wickedness.

Um...what? Who's saying that?

I'm not sure I follow exactly what you're asking. The primary question is, what if one doesn't love God. The answer: Wo unto them. I suppose. Or is your question: How do we love God?

No. I'll admit it. I strawman'd it. If this were universally true, I agree. My experience tells me otherwise. Liberal Mormons, to my understanding, are always "liberal" doctrinally at some level.

Interesting. Is common consent required to de-canonize something?

I'd say "exclusively" is probably taking it a bit too far.

Wouldn't simply saying "all of Heavenly Father's children have the potential to be like Him, not just the men" be sufficient to make this point?

I spoke without looking to the left at your "none" religious affiliation. My bad.

From an Adamic p.o.v., is there anyone, really, who is not? :)

*shrug* I can't say I understand. I hope I do. But my backing out it more related to wanting to avoid an argument that I don't think is based around a whole lot of skin in the game, if that makes sense. I expect one can approach empathy through a variety of means and, whereas some may be more effective than others, the ultimate issue in all our lives is our relationship and choices concerning God and His Son. I expect we agree on that.

I suspect it's been said already (haven't read the entire thread), but it does not require abandonment of church membership and re-baptism to learn and re-commit to covenants made. More importantly, giving up the Gift of the Holy Ghost seems a pretty poor way to seek truth. Are you expecting that upon throwing this, one of the greatest of all the gifts of God, back in His face that it will help you feel and learn from the Spirit better? Odd approach to a search for greater truth, imo.

Aaarrgghh. I was right there with you until this. You may be surprised to hear this, but depression over failure with dating is pretty common. Holding to the faith is my counsel. Dropping standards and faith is absolutely guaranteeing failure. At the least the traditional wife you want will never be attracted to that kind of a person. At the most, what good will it do you to find a great wife and lose your soul? Get your life in order. Period! Then move forward and trust the Lord. Otherwise, you're lost for sure.

It is, frankly, impossible to do what you're suggesting. Unless, of course, one has gone through the Atonement. The only one who can understand where we are all coming from is Christ. But I don't want to get into an argument where others utterly fail to understand where I'm coming from as they argue that understanding where others are coming from is important and valid. So I'm backing out.

I'm not meaning to just argue...but the idea that every "apostate" is going through one of the best experiences of their life seems a mighty stretch to me. The idea that you could possibly know that she will exercise her agency as you describe also strikes me as entirely unknowable. This, however, is spot on.

Irrelevant. The proper response (or question) is whether the logic makes sense with the Lord's premise. (By which I mean eternal truths. The Lord doesn't exactly have premises.) :)

My thoughts exactly. Most of the OP was quite interesting. I think it a discussion worth having...until the apostle smearing enters in... I don't know about "one hundred percent" correct though. That may be a wee bit extreme. But as a general concept, to drive the discussion from the point of view that God's church was led according to His will, and that what we have as scripture is meant, by the Lord, to be what we have as scripture. Within that context, it's a very interesting thought. Edit: I said my thoughts "exactly" and then proceeded to explain how my thoughts were not "exactly" the same. Hmm.

This is an interesting reading of this scripture. I have never translated it to mean that the pleasing word would be daggers to them. I have always read it as the pleasing word would not be given at all, and instead daggers would be given. But what you're proposing, actually, makes a lot of sense.

Hmm...not sure that's a good way to go. Seems to me like it might be more inclined to lead to an argument about whether what I said was truth or not. Don't get me wrong. I have found almost all posts herein this thread meaningful and insightful. Clarifications I have posted of my meaning are to expand the discussion and direct it according to my hopes (though I allow that the discussion can go in other directions (and it has) and still be meaningful and insightful).

This is a logical fallacy drawn from my comments. I can fully testify that I, being ultra conservative, am just as unwelcome and unvalued by just as many members as you. People are jerks. That has no bearing on my comments. Humility is humility. Becoming like the Savior is becoming like the Savior. Following the strait and narrow path is following the strait and narrow path. Feeling welcome or valued, while a valid issue, is another issue entirely and has naught to do with my point. Logical fallacy: Because liberal Mormons are often judged by conservative Mormons it is okay to be liberal.

In my opinion as soon as you "step outside your religion" you have failed them. You can and should, of course, choose what to say about that religion, and that may well often mean nothing at all. But you, yourself, should never step outside it in your thinking, faith, belief, and trust. There is no comfort beyond. Only in and through the Atonement of the Savior can any true comfort be found.

I read the OP as talking about liberal Mormonism, rather than liberal politics. Of course there are semantic issues involved. What is actually meant by "liberal"? Like some of the stuff anatess was saying is liberal... What? I'm clearly not in sync with whatever she's thinking. My view is that being liberal as a Mormon usually means prescribing to a looser idea of belief than is standard in the gospel. It refers to those who disagree with basic, common tenets such as "follow the prophet". Liberals tend to excuse away ideas they are uncomfortable with. They tend to put their thinking and ideologies above the teachings of the leaders of the church. Such thinking is, in my opinion, off the correct path. It may not be turned around heading the opposite direction. But neither is it straight and true. There is only one way, only one truth, only one path, and only one method of thinking that will lead to salvation. That is complete and absolute submission to He who is mighty to save. Complete submission to Him. Complete consecration to His church and kingdom. A total and absolute sacrifice of self. And that's a pretty conservative-Mormon thing in my view.

And priesthoodpower wins the most offensive post of the day award.

Totally agree. Tone is extremely difficult in writing. It's a skill that I struggle with.

True. But boorish is more often in the eye of the beholder methinks. Political debates are a good example. The republican crowd sees the democrat as boorish, the democrats the republican as boorish... (and the reality is they both are...perhaps besides the point though...) But there are, certainly those fence sitters who are swayed by the good argument that some find boorish and others find spot on. Just thinking through it with my writing....

The thing is that telling someone you cannot come because of such a thing is not true. You certainly can go in spite of that thing. However, to your point, there is clearly an argument to be made that speaking the gospel truth is not always appropriate. Your scenario would be boorish. But what about a catholic asking you point blank about the LDS view on infant baptism? And let's even throw in the "as I feel it has been revealed to me" part. Would that offend any less? "What is the LDS view on infant baptism?" "It is an abomination, as I feel it has been revealed to me." Seems pretty offensive still.