I'm In Tears -- Help!

[candyprpl]

You're awesome Misshalfway,LOL!

[Misshalfway]

You're awesome Misshalfway,LOL!

Well......halfway to awesome anyway! Hahahahha

You are the one who is awesome!

no you!

no you!

no you!

:) (I know......I have too much time on my hands. hahahaha)

[HiJolly]

:twothumbsup:That's great!

How do you respond to people who don't think we need continuing revelation? I always thought that the Bible was the only Word of God we needed. But like Misshalfway, what I'm learning now, 'just makes sense.'

Every scripture written is from somebody's 'continuing revelation', and God is the same today, yesterday and forever. It's our LDS viewpoint, and if someone doesn't want to believe it, that's their priviledge.

HiJolly

[Guest ceeboo]

Ceeboo -- I've read quite a few of your posts and sometimes (honestly) I get frustrated with you. I'm not so sure that what you would bring to the table I would find offensive as long as it was presented in a non-sarcastic manner. I know the Catholic church states itself to be the 'one true church' and I've read the scriptures that support that. That's my problem exactly -- I don't interpret those scriptures the same way -- my dilemma.

.

Hi again candyprpl,

Sorry if I have caused you to be frustrated. I think that may be the price we ALL pay ( me included) when we try and discuss our differing beliefs while at the same time try and lend the respect and Christianity we would like in return.

The Catholic Church does not state that it is the " one true church " it does state that it is the original rock, Peter " church " that Jesus left for us all and that it is the fullest whole universal original church. All of our protestent brethren ( there are thousands beginning in the 1500's) are indeed splinters from that first " original universal ( Catholic ) Church.

Your interpretation of scripture or mine or the several hundred thousands of " Christian leaders " over the last 500 years or so IS THE EXACT SOURCE OF THE CONFUSION IMHO

and I will add that it is also the root for the desire or need to " choose " the flavor or Christianity that is most appetizing to pick from.

Sorry again for causing frustration.:)

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

Your interpretation of scripture or mine or the several hundred thousands of " Christian leaders " over the last 500 years or so IS THE EXACT SOURCE OF THE CONFUSION IMHO

and I will add that it is also the root for the desire or need to " choose " the flavor or Christianity that is most appetizing to pick from.

So how do you answer the question "who of all of these groups is right" ? and How can one know that they have indeed found the truth that God himself would sign off on. Especially with so much confusion and convincing perspectives.

[Guest ceeboo]

I do know that this is the only true church on the earth. It is a bold statement. I don't expect anything less from the Savior of this world and from the Father of us all. I am not afraid of such a statement nor do I think this statement that should be feared. Why wouldn't Jesus lead a church and help that church along with revelation? Why wouldn't he reveal himself to chosen prophets in every dispensation and time from the beginning of this world until he comes again at the end of it? These are logical to me. It is a light to be shone ...not something to be hid under a bushel. But in the same breath.....let all men go in peace and worship as they may. And I pray that they can do so in peace without threat or offense in their hearts because we believe as we do.

Hi Misshalfway,

If you know that LDS is the only true church on earth and I STRONGLY believe that it is not, then how far can that discussion go before it becomes unloving and un-Christ-like??

I would add that the things suggested in your post " are logical to you " ( obviously ) but far from logical to me.

So, this leaves puts us full circle, how can this conversation ( or pill swallowing ) be of any benefit to anyone reading this thread??:confused:

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

It was a simple question and only that to see if I could understand your perspectives better. It wasn't meant as a tactic of argument or to put you on the spot. I don't mind that you believe differently than I do and if you explained your view, I could receive such in peace. If it isn't something you can answer without feeling contentious....I take it off the table. My apologies.

And btw....i feel suddenly like you are screaming at me.

[Guest ceeboo]

So how do you answer the question "who of all of these groups is right" ? and How can one know that they have indeed found the truth that God himself would sign off on. Especially with so much confusion and convincing perspectives.

Hi again Misshalfway,

" Who of all these groups is right " Not a matter of who is more right or who is more wrong. ( not a contest as I see it )

It is absolutly a matter of trying as best you can to go directly to the source and the thousands of witnesses to that source. If you consider that then the only authentic teaching and history would be the only Christian church there was on earth for the first 1500 years after Jesus was crucified.

" How can one know that they indeed found the truth that God would sign of on " ??????

Not sure what you mean but IMHO since God himself was the onw who taught,loved, was crucified, and then rose again, I would suggest that would be what God " signed off on "

" Confusion and convincing perspectives " :confused: ( Not for me )

There will never be anyone more " convincing " that Jesus himself.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

It was a simple question and only that to see if I could understand your perspectives better. It wasn't meant as a tactic of argument or to put you on the spot. I don't mind that you believe differently than I do and if you explained your view, I could receive such in peace. If it isn't something you can answer without feeling contentious....I take it off the table. My apologies.

And btw....i feel suddenly like you are screaming at me.

Hi again Misshalfway,

Sorry, I must have missed the question ?? I thought it was statements of truth.:)

Why do you feel I am screaming at you:confused:

Maybe that in itself should speak volumes as to the nature and challenges for all on this thread ??

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

Perhaps I worded my question poorly. Wouldn't be the first time.

But I thank you for trying to answer. I really did only seek to understand your point of your earlier posts and your perspectives. And I was trying to open the dialogue to you. I seem to have failed miserably in opening such a dialogue.

I think I will withdraw from this thread. I perhaps have made Candy's point beautifully. But I hope that you and Candy both know that such was unintentional.

sadly and apologetically.....misshalfway

[candyprpl]

Well......halfway to awesome anyway! Hahahahha

You are the one who is awesome!

no you!

no you!

no you!

:) (I know......I have too much time on my hands. hahahaha)

:animatedlol:

[candyprpl]

Perhaps I worded my question poorly. Wouldn't be the first time.

But I thank you for trying to answer. I really did only seek to understand your point of your earlier posts and your perspectives. And I was trying to open the dialogue to you. I seem to have failed miserably in opening such a dialogue.

I think I will withdraw from this thread. I perhaps have made Candy's point beautifully. But I hope that you and Candy both know that such was unintentional.

sadly and apologetically.....misshalfway

Oh people, don't get upset -- these kind of conversations are difficult -- but, if it's true that we choose what we feel is right for us -- why can't we try to understand what it is that makes it right for you and not for me, etc.

Maybe more would be revealed to us from our Heavenly Father if we could come to some kind of understanding between the faiths. I don't know -- maybe I'm just too much of a dreamer. I do a lot of day-dreaming, always have.

[Misshalfway]

You are right Candy! I am not upset. I guess we can all choose how we react when someone has an opposing point of view.

I actually think these dialogues are healthy. They help us learn.....even if sometimes we stumble. I hope that I am better about tolerating human-ness as I move forward. And I hope to continue participating in religious conversation. I find it a most enjoyable experience!

[candyprpl]

you Are Right Candy! I Am Not Upset. I Guess We Can All Choose How We React When Someone Has An Opposing Point Of View.

I Actually Think These Dialogues Are Healthy. They Help Us Learn.....even If Sometimes We Stumble. I Hope That I Am Better About Tolerating Human-ness As I Move Forward. And I Hope To Continue Participating In Religious Conversation. I Find It A Most Enjoyable Experience!

Me too!!!!

[Guest ceeboo]

Oh people, don't get upset -- these kind of conversations are difficult -- but, if it's true that we choose what we feel is right for us -- why can't we try to understand what it is that makes it right for you and not for me, etc.

.

Hi again candyprpl,

See what you started ( just kidding ):):)

Difficult ( an understatement ) especially when you use the keyboard with no tone or human compassion that can be displayed in person.

I think we can offer eachother different perspective, respect, interesting dialouge, knowledge, kindness and dignity.

Sadly, I must add, that we both can not have the truth when the two are at odds.:(

That is what makes this thread so very hard and difficult to share in.

God bless,

Carl

[Guest ceeboo]

You are right Candy! I am not upset. I guess we can all choose how we react when someone has an opposing point of view.

I actually think these dialogues are healthy. They help us learn.....even if sometimes we stumble. I hope that I am better about tolerating human-ness as I move forward. And I hope to continue participating in religious conversation. I find it a most enjoyable experience!

Hey !!!!!!! you can't come back after you said you were abandoning this thread

( obviously just kidding ):):):)

Glad your back to share.

God bless,

Your crazy Catholic friend Carl :)

[Misshalfway]

Hi again candyprpl,

Sadly, I must add, that we both can not have the truth when the two are at odds.:(

That is what makes this thread so very hard and difficult to share in.

God bless,

Carl

I hate that it is difficult to share. I hate it when someone of another faith comes here and feels as though there isn't a place for mutual sharing.

This was precisely my goal. Trying to create a comfortable space for you, someone I have come to enjoy and respect, and to open door to share safely.

I clearly need to work on my technique. Hahahaha.

I think perhaps what we do is to build on the common beliefs that we share. The Savior and the beauty of the bible. We can find some loveliness there.....don't you think????

And if I get out of line....you can shoot me with silly string!

And Yes, I am back. I suppose you are both stuck with me (along with all of my many foibles!) I am hopelessly in love with both of you!!!!

Much Love.

Edited August 26, 2008 by Misshalfway

[candyprpl]

This is great! I'm glad we're all friends again,LOL!

I agree, we can build on the common beliefs that we share.:)

[Guest ceeboo]

I hate that it is difficult to share. I hate it when someone of another faith comes here and feels as though there isn't a place for mutual sharing.

This was precisely my goal. Trying to create a comfortable space for you, someone I have come to enjoy and respect, and to open door to share safely.

.

I believe you were indeed trying ( and have tried several times in the recent past ) to create this comfy space.

I ( an example of someone from said other faith ) have found and still find it VERY VERY VERY difficult. I will try and explain, I am on an LDS forum and my reasons for coming are not the same reasons I stayed. My reasons for coming was to learn and gain knowledge directly from the source ( with lots of kindness and willingness from members of LDS I have been able to do just that ) I greatly appreciate that :). My reasons for staying is that I have had a blast and have enormously enjoyed the people on this forum as well all the deep interesting contributions made from a variety of perspectives.

For me ( Catholic ) to come here and start tossing about my personal views or beliefs in regard and in conflict to the religion you love would be nothing short of rude, disrespectfull, and quite arrogant, not to mention the potential impact it may have on new members or members who could possibly be very young and unsolid at this point.

I would add that, believe it or not, I am not the kind of Man who would enjoy the contention that would certainly follow.

I hope that babble made some sense.

God bless,

Carl

[Misshalfway]

I believe you were indeed trying ( and have tried several times in the recent past ) to create this comfy space.

I ( an example of someone from said other faith ) have found and still find it VERY VERY VERY difficult. I will try and explain, I am on an LDS forum and my reasons for coming are not the same reasons I stayed. My reasons for coming was to learn and gain knowledge directly from the source ( with lots of kindness and willingness from members of LDS I have been able to do just that ) I greatly appreciate that :). My reasons for staying is that I have had a blast and have enormously enjoyed the people on this forum as well all the deep interesting contributions made from a variety of perspectives.

For me ( Catholic ) to come here and start tossing about my personal views or beliefs in regard and in conflict to the religion you love would be nothing short of rude, disrespectfull, and quite arrogant, not to mention the potential impact it may have on new members or members who could possibly be very young and unsolid at this point.

I would add that, believe it or not, I am not the kind of Man who would enjoy the contention that would certainly follow.

I hope that babble made some sense.

God bless,

Carl

Well, I actually really appreciate your babblings. :) Because I don't think I realized why you were here or the difficulty factor you have expressed. People come here for so many reasons and since I can't or shouldn't know those reasons, I simply try to be as accommodating and respectful as possible.

In your case, I see you posting in the fun and playful realms, but I also see you participating in doctrinal discussions and asking for clarification here and there and even venturing towards making comments. I was not so clear as to how comfortable you are in that realm or what you hoped to accomplish nor did it matter to me. Perhaps you are testing the waters..... I don't know. From my perspective, why wouldn't I try to help someone like you who is asking questions to understand or to make things less threatening or to at least de-code mormon verbiage so you can understand what we mean by what we say? Look, I have been a mormon all my life. I am used to taking the hits! And I am at peace with the hits and understand why they come -- well most of them. I am not threatened in the least that you disagree so adamantly. I am comfortable with such disagreement. You are respectful and kind and I trust that. You, I am sure, have wonderful insights....Insights which I welcome even if they come from the other side of the street.

There are people that come here in disagreement and throw it around like a giant destructive baseball bat. There are others that temper their inner objections with simply trying to understand and they are able to disagree or add perspective or compare doctrine without it ever becoming contentious or personally threatening. I perhaps made the mistake of assuming that kind of dialogue could happen here.

But having said all of that, I restate that I appreciate you sharing with me/us the difficulty you feel. That is something that I can be more sensitive about in the future and perhaps give you space to explore and play here to whatever comfort level you find. And I will suspend all of my rogue questioning :) if that helps.

Much love as always.

Mhw

[rameumptom]

Ceeboo, I think most of us have no problem if you share your perspective on different views. We know you would strive to share your views in a respectful manner, even if they are different than the LDS view. For example, I have no problem in someone sharing their view of the Trinity. I hope they know that most of us will differ on that view, as Mormons believe in what is known as a social Trinity (something actually suggested by some scholarly traditional Christians, but rejected by most traditional Christians).

Now, were you to call us to repentance or burn in hell for our view of the Godhead, perhaps we'd need to take you out behind the woodshed on that one....

[Guest ceeboo]

Mormons believe in what is known as a social Trinity (something actually suggested by some scholarly traditional Christians, but rejected by most traditional Christians).

Now, were you to call us to repentance or burn in hell for our view of the Godhead, perhaps we'd need to take you out behind the woodshed on that one....

Hi ram,

Thanks for the contribution :)

Not trying to split hairs but I noticed your use of scholarly for one group and not the other.

I would offer ( to be fair ) it was rejected by most scholary trdational Christians.:)

God bless,

Carl

[candyprpl]

I admit I have not read the entier thread, I just wanted to post this though, thought it applied...

11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.

12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no apurpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.

13 And if ye shall say there is ano law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not bthere is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.

14 And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and alearning; for there is a God, and he hath bcreated all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be cacted upon.

15 And to bring about his eternal purposes in the end of man, after he had bcreated our first parents, and the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and in fine, all things which are created, it must needs be that there was an opposition; even the forbidden efruit in fopposition to the gtree of life; the one being sweet and the other bitter.

16 Wherefore, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not bact for himself save it should be that he was centiced by the one or the other.

:)

Thanks Changed for that scripture. I do sometimes forget that opposition is part of 'the plan.':)

Hey Ceeboo,

I don't know how long this thread will last, how long people will participate -- I hope others of different faiths will join at some point. I'm still optimistic that we can participate in an adult conversation, without childish name-calling, LOL!

I'm interested in what other's believe (as I've already stated) and being able to do this in forum form makes it easy for practically home-bound (like myself) to discuss such matters. I greatly appreciate your consideration for my beliefs and I (like misshalfway) are glad you are here -- for whatever reason.

I was wondering if you (Ceeboo) were familiar with a book, "Pageant of the Popes" by John Farrow (1942). While searching Ancient Scripture sites this book was mentioned, it caught my attention because it starts with Peter. I do want to know more about the history of the Catholic church.

And many (here in this forum) have told me to read Rough Stone Rolling about Joseph Smith and Mormon Enigma - Emma Hale Smith. I also just got them -- so I have lots of reading to do. Probably will have lots of questions for all of you:lol:

[rameumptom]

Hi ram,

Thanks for the contribution :)

Not trying to split hairs but I noticed your use of scholarly for one group and not the other.

I would offer ( to be fair ) it was rejected by most scholary trdational Christians.:)

God bless,

Carl

Fair enough for me, too. And could I have the half of hair without the curl?

[candyprpl]

Oh Ram, you always ask for the impossible!LOL!