Snow Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 Originally posted by Shawn@Feb 2 2004, 07:47 PM Members of this board,I will consider myself "sent packing" and apologize for getting involved in somthing I don't fully understand (before you get too excited at your victory, I'm speaking of message boards and not the Gospel of Jesus Christ). I have discovered that sincerity cannot be expressed in this form of communication and the end result can be sarcasm (of which I too have been guilty). I'm pretty certain that were we all in a room face to face with an unbiased monitor all my questions (and yours) would receive a reasonable response and the exact positions of both sides would be made known. I know when I'm out of my league and in this forum I am. I apologize for whatever I have implied, said, or requested that got the dander up of the regulars. Relentlessness is my natural (albeit erroneous) response when I sense I'm getting the run-around on something, but I will assume I am the one whose brought all the hostility and beg your forgiveness for my inept attempts at on-line discussions. I ask your fogiveness, admit my guilt, and resign from attempting to spread a message I am convincted to spread. I must find other avenues of expression than this.In Jesus,Shawn McCraney There's no harm done Shawn. Drop the agenda and stick around if you want. If you had me in mind in your last post, I accept your contrition and will gladly read your next post in the spirit in which it is intended. Quote
Ray Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 I have discovered that sincerity cannot be expressed in this form of communication and the end result can be sarcasm (of which I too have been guilty).Am I the only one who thinks Shawn was saying that he can’t express his beliefs without giving in to sarcasm? That he can’t be sincere when composing a written message even though he can take all the time he wants and needs to compose it?I'm pretty certain that were we all in a room face to face with an unbiased monitor all my questions (and yours) would receive a reasonable response and the exact positions of both sides would be made known.I have a hard time believing that you would fare any better in a face to face discussion with anyone who understands "LDS doctrine", considering that a face to face discussion usually involves having less time to consider your own response. And what does that have to do with sincerity anyway? In a sincere discussion, a person should simply state what is on his or her mind to the best of their ability.I ask your forgiveness, admit my guilt, and resign from attempting to spread a message I am convicted to spread. I must find other avenues of expression than this.You may be able to find other avenues for expressing your opinion, but if you don’t’ focus on your ability to discuss things with more sincerity, and humility, and love, you will not do any better at reaching anybody with your message. Maybe what you want is to find an avenue where you can just preach to somebody, without giving them an opportunity to respond? If that’s what you want, there are lots of people out there who will let you preach to them, especially if you say things that in agreement with what they think and want to hear. Quote
Lindy Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 Bottom-line, Latter-day Saints do not belive salvation would be available to Man without Joseph Smith.And I will tell you on the board, HOGWASH!You really weren't paying attention in Sunday School classes Shawn, or anyother class for that matter.Born-Again Mormons know Jesus is the ONLY thing necessary to live with God again. Answer me this Shawn....those who know Christ as their personnal Savior, but still sin and do things they know they shouldn't do, but figure that the they are saved by grace knowing that it's the ONLY thing they need to have to get to heaven. Is that right? I don't think it is.----------------Edited to add this:My apology to Shawn about jumping the gun before I really understood his intentions...SORRY Shawn Quote
Guest Starsky Posted February 3, 2004 Report Posted February 3, 2004 So what you are saying Shawn is: Joseph Smith wasn't necessary (or at least someone like him...after all he was threatened by God to be replaced if he kept messing up)? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.